mailing list archives
RE: Stability of the Internet?
From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer () mhsc com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 15:06:16 -0700
From: Bruce Campbell [mailto:bc () vicious dropbear id au]
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 10:41 PM
On Fri, 18 May 2001, Eric A. Hall wrote:
There is some (as yet unpublished) research data that says
~20% of the
queries currently going to the root servers are for invalid
TLDs (as setup
by .private internal operators). Endorsing the use of
private domains will
make this much worse.
There was some mention (cue bill) at the last IETF about an
'.int' for internal networks by some insert-dns-clueless-company-here.
which of course sends (significant?) unwanted traffic towards the .int
Since INT is for intenational treaty organization, the use of INT internally
would create a collision. Thereby, masking the entire INT TLD from the
clueless org that did that. In past /ICANN/DNSO discussions it has been
suggested, that we reserve a LOCAL or PRIVATE TLD for internal use only. Let
me know what y'all think and which one y'all prefer. My personal preference
is for both (three tiered <Internet>/Local/Private). The next question is;
should this be an RFC?
A better step would be to thoroughly endorse .private or
similar, and have
the distributed root.hints file point it back to the local
such dns traffic does not end up on the cruel and heartless internet.
You gotta be careful here, to not point to a recursive server, for a
Of course, lack of clue when setting up internal networks will always
happen (such as allowing those queries out, or not setting up
private tree off your regular domain etc etc).