To:
Ed Sawicki <ed@alcpress.com>
Cc:
Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>, dnsop@cafax.se
From:
Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>
Date:
Fri, 21 Feb 2003 13:47:22 +0100
In-Reply-To:
<1045817420.1859.179.camel@red>
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: Why one port?
At 12:50 AM -0800 2003/02/21, Ed Sawicki wrote:
> I don't know. Allocate another port and rewrite
> resolvers, libraries, and recursive name servers/caches?
Riiiiiiiight. You're going to fix all machines on the entire
Internet? I don't think so.
We might theoretically add another port for non-recursive
server-to-server communications, at at some point in the far distant
future, we might be able to switch port 53 to be recursive only.
But all current nameserver software would have to be fixed, and
we'd have to monitor how many queries are coming in to what machines
on what ports and only make the cutover once we got past some
milestone threshold -- e.g., less than 10% of all queries are coming
in to port 53.
Frankly, without a predefined Flag Day, I don't think you could
make this work. And I don't think you'd want to try to define a Flag
Day until this sort of thing was relatively widely adopted already.
--
Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles@skynet.be>
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.
GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+
!w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)
#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.