the document makes a number of assertions about empirical evidence, and how was it used to understand the impact of these technologies, without any supporting citations.
the comments on DNS(SEC) query size increase beg the questions: how often was a signed response requested? what fraction of requests were they? what fraction of (byte) traffic were they, in both directions?
the comments on EDNS0 were inconsistent with the DITL2006-2009 data. which root servers are being reported on? the DITL data shows that although the query population is dominated by EDNS-capable queries, most of those queries are actually pollution anyway, and the client level shows quite the opposite -- closer to 30% support -- and dropped precipitously at all observed roots since 2007. (slide 11-15 ofhttps://www.dns-oarc.net/files/workshop-200911/Sebastian_Castro.pdf ) icann needs to acknowledge this issue and explain why they believe it's not relevant to dnssec scaling.
"all of the organizations involved in root management have indicated that they will adjust their resources to meet demand." where are RSSAC's and NTIA's commitment to this statement?
perhaps most importantly, "The primary consideration thus becomes detecting the increased loads prior to them becoming an issue" -- what activities are being undertaken to address this outstanding issue? or what is the board's plan for addressing it? the last SSR workshop focused on this document, but the workshop participants themselves believed the workshop failed to yield answers to questions on how to measure the impact of root scaling:http://www.icann.org/en/topics/ssr/dns-ssr-symposium-report-1-3feb10-en.pdf (p.40).
No comments:
Post a Comment