To:
Bruce Campbell <bruce.campbell@ripe.net>
Cc:
Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>, David Conrad <david.conrad@nominum.com>, <dnsop@cafax.se>
From:
Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>
Date:
Tue, 29 Apr 2003 12:24:34 +0200
In-Reply-To:
<Pine.LNX.4.44.0304281612230.15834-100000@x22.ripe.net>
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: draft-ietf-dnsop-serverid-01.txt
At 4:22 PM +0200 2003/04/28, Bruce Campbell wrote:
> Myself, I've found that said assumption holds fairly true for:
>
> verify problem @nameserver
> dig identifier @nameserver
> verify problem @nameserver
This is exactly what I did for my presentation at LISA 2002. I
ran 35 cycles like this (with a short sleep between cycles), and if
all 35 came up exactly the same way (i.e., 1 & 3 worked, but 2 did
not), then I considered this sufficient evidence to claim that the
server is probably broken in the case of the middle query.
Still, it's not deterministic, and any number of samples that can
be counted by a human being are going to be vanishingly small
compared to the real workload of the server. At best, it's a "good"
indication, for some value of "good".
--
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>.