[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
cc: Mark_Andrews@isc.org, randy@psg.com, dnsop@cafax.se, marka@isc.org
From: marka@isc.org
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 15:18:31 +1000
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 09 Jul 1999 13:10:06 +0200." <199907090410.NAA17271@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Sender: owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject: Re: Topological Motivation for draft-ohta-root-servers-01.txt?


> Mark;
> 
> > 	Nothing.  Will they get significantly better service?  I doubt it
> > 	unless the server in France is overloaded.
> 
> Irrelevant.
> 
> Or, can you try to stop the operations of, say, InterNIC root server,
> saying the operators that their operation does not contribute to the
> significantly better service?
> 
> BTW, it is evil for you to judge the significance of the improvement.
> 
> > 	The siting of server should be based on need.
> 
> If the seed were limited, yes.

	The sites are limited.  If they were unlimited just let ever
	nameserver in the world secondary "." and be done with it.
	Can the existing root nameservers cope with however many million
	servers there are in the world all deciding within the refresh
	interval to transfer a copy of the root zone?  Remember there is
	still exponential growth here and we want the result to still be
	managable in 10 years time.  This is what this draft taken to it
	ultimate extreme leads to.

	If we want to stop short of that there has to be a critera for
	saying, "Yes, You can transfer the root zone." or "No, You are
	not allowed to transfer the root zone."
> 
> > > If you don't want it, what is the point of defining the siting?
> > 
> > 	So that we get resonably uniform service levels wherever you
> > 	are in the world.
> 
> Uniform service level?

	Would you say that the service levels relativly uniform around
	the world?  I demonstrated the I could pick 2 well connected
	sites in the world and have vastly different service levels.
	Isn't the lack of uniform service at the moment driving this
	draft?  Why do you say each country needs a root server?  Is
	it prestige?  Some misguided nationalistic pride?  Or is so 
	that they can get timely responses?

	Every country does not need a root name server.
	Every country needs good root name service.

> 
> As long as someone, not you, can define the service level, that
> person may be satisfied.
> 
> But, the requirement to the service level is not uniform.
> 
> 							Masataka Ohta
> 
--
Mark Andrews, Internet Software Consortium
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka@isc.org

Home | Date list | Subject list