On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 11:02:10AM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> wrote a message of 29 lines which said:
I had, personally, many things to say. More on that later.
OK, apparently, I had less time than anticipated. Anyway, a few comments on the whole "root zone scaling studies" thing: * I liked a lot the OARC report <http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-17sep09-en.htm> because it is mostly made of hard facts and figures, actual measurements, not vague guesses "This thing could go wrong". * The terms set by ICANN (for instance <http://www.icann.org/en/committees/dns-root/root-scaling-study-tor-05may09-en.htm>) mixes up completely different things, such as: * IPv6 (already done, and working fine despite the FUD that delayed the entry of AAAA records in the root for a long time) * IDN (zero technical consequences for the root, off-topic for a "root zone scaling" report) * DNSSEC (real technical issues) * more TLD (may be a false problem or not, depending on the actual number. I was shocked at the DNS meeting to hear a participant making repeated references to one million TLD, a ridiculous number, that could never be reached, due to ICANN constraints <http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-3-en.htm#files>). So, there is little a technical WG like the DNS WG could say about these reports. The question is so badly phrased that noone can really reply to it.