[discuss] rootservers

[Carlos A. Afonso]

I agree with Steve, but the list also shows that out of 250 ccTLDs 149 
do not have any server in their territories - so they did not even get 
to the beginning of the discussion :)

--c.a.

On 02/24/2014 12:38 PM, Steve Crocker wrote:
> Marilyn, et al,
>
> Thanks.  Two comments about root servers…
>
> 1. A list of which countries have root servers and which do not is
> the beginning but not the end of the discussion.  The technical
> question is whether a locale is being served well enough.  "Well
> enough" is usually measured in terms of delay to get an answer to a
> look up, e.g. 89 milliseconds, and reliability, e.g. answers are
> received 99.923% of the time.  (Both of the numbers in the previous
> sentence are illustrative and not related to any actual measurement.
> I made them up as I typed.)  On the other hand, many people seem
> concerned with political questions, e.g. which countries are
> important enough to have root servers.  It would help the discussion
> to know what questions are being asked.  The list of root server
> locations may or may not be relevant.
>
> 2. The root zone is just the top level of the DNS hierarchy.  After
> receiving an answer from a root zone server, the resolver then has to
> make another query to the TLD's name server.  If the TLD's name
> server is far away, slow or not responding, having a local copy of
> the root zone isn't much help.  As a practical matter, it maybe
> *much* better to have a local copy of the .com zone than the root
> zone.
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 24, 2014, at 10:26 AM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> David is right, but this was probably an unintended change in
>> 'terminology'. So, we still should call a root server, as it is a
>> root server. :-)
>>
>> I will just make a comment about definitions and terminology. While
>> not alone in this challenge, within the Business Constituency
>> @ICANN, we found that we had to devote time to creating an "acronym
>> buster" [sorry for the slang terminology], in order to decode the
>> vast number of terms, and abbreviations.
>>
>> Others have undertaken similar challenging tasks, but creating new
>> labels for existing functions/things which are well entrenched in a
>> lot of materials and working activities will to me delay our
>> ability to focus on challenging work.
>>
>> Pasted here from David Conrad's response: "It might also be useful
>> to observe that a common technique at larger ISPs and other
>> resolver operators is to mirror the root zone into their resolvers,
>> thereby removing the need of those resolvers to actually query the
>> root servers.  As such, those resolvers could be considered to be a
>> form of root name servers as well. Of course, it is a bit
>> challenging to identify which resolvers actually do this
>> mirroring..."
>>
>> I support David's comment about the function of the larger ISPs and
>> web hosting companies, and actually even very large corporations
>> that are NOT ISPs or networking companies, but who operate huge
>> networks that may serve business functions -- for instance, many
>> banks, in many part of the world, operate secure networks, and so
>> they may also be mirroring the root zone in their resolvers.
>>
>> However, while the resolver  performs that function, I wouldn't
>> call them a root server, but would agree with David's statement
>> overall.
>>
>> It is interesting to me that we are talking about this, and I feel
>> lucky that really informed and experienced contributors are
>> contributing.
>>
>> Marilyn Cade
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>> On Feb 24, 2014, at 11:44 AM, "David Conrad"
>>> <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Elisabeth,
>>>
>>>> On Feb 24, 2014, at 12:10 PM, Elisabeth Blanconil
>>>> <info at vgnic.org> wrote: Here is the distribution of the 365 top
>>>> zone name servers (root servers)
>>>
>>> I suspect creating a new term for the root name servers is
>>> unlikely to be helpful to anyone.
>>>
>>>> made available by the two VGNICs I know of (ICANN/IANA and
>>>> ORSN).
>>>
>>> What's a "VGNIC"?  I presume it is not the Network Information
>>> Center for the British Virgin Island (a la JPNIC, CNNIC, KRNIC,
>>> TWNIC, etc).
>>>
>>>> They are broken down per countries as follows:
>>>
>>> A graphical representation of root name server instance
>>> distribution can be found at:
>>>
>>> http://www.root-servers.org
>>>
>>> (Note that the location of the "B" root name server instance is
>>> not in the South Atlantic just off the coast of western Africa
>>> (Lat: 0, Lon: 0), but in Los Angeles, US).
>>>
>>> Regards, -drc
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ discuss mailing
>>> list discuss at 1net.org
>>> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>> _______________________________________________ discuss mailing
>> list discuss at 1net.org
>> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
> _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>