[ Sorry if this has been discussed before ] Recenlty I came across ORSN <http://www.orsn.net/>. Soonafter I discovered that one of our peers is using their rootzone (and we are forwarding queries to them). So, the question is: What do you think of this effort? o any members of the group use the ORSN-SERVERS.NET root instead of the traditional one? If so why? If not why? TIA, -Yiorgos.
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Yiorgos Adamopoulos wrote:
Recenlty I came across ORSN <http://www.orsn.net/>. Soonafter I discovered that one of our peers is using their rootzone (and we are forwarding queries to them).
So, the question is: What do you think of this effort? o any members of the group use the ORSN-SERVERS.NET root instead of the traditional one? If so why? If not why?
This effort is undermining the stability of the DNS Please read RFC 2826 http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2826.txt Roy
On Wed, 2004-10-13 at 10:28 +0200, Roy Arends wrote:
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Yiorgos Adamopoulos wrote:
Recenlty I came across ORSN <http://www.orsn.net/>. Soonafter I discovered that one of our peers is using their rootzone (and we are forwarding queries to them).
So, the question is: What do you think of this effort? o any members of the group use the ORSN-SERVERS.NET root instead of the traditional one? If so why? If not why?
This effort is undermining the stability of the DNS
Please read RFC 2826
RFC's are still Request For Comments, not Standards, nevertheless anyone can choose to use any infrastructure, rootserver, firewalling policies, routing policies and a whole lot of other politics that that person/organisation whishes to follow. For that matter if someone would setup his/her/it's own RIR and started giving out IPv4 or IPv6 addresses, who is going to stop you? That it won't interoperate with what most of the people on this globe call 'the internet' is another question, but isn't that their problem? Greets, Jeroen
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 10:35:50AM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
For that matter if someone would setup his/her/it's own RIR and started giving out IPv4 or IPv6 addresses, who is going to stop you? That it won't interoperate with what most of the people on this globe call 'the internet' is another question, but isn't that their problem?
As soon as I have to deal with the fallout of that, it certainly becomes _my_ problem. Regards, Daniel -- CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
RFC's are still Request For Comments, not Standards
You're plain wrong. Period. No matter what the title, RFC's are standards that are cast in concrete, until the time that they're superseded by a new RFC.
For that matter if someone would setup his/her/it's own RIR and started giving out IPv4 or IPv6 addresses, who is going to stop you?
Nobody is going to stop an idiot.
That it won't interoperate with what most of the people on this globe call 'the internet' is another question, but isn't that their problem?
It's both their problem and the problem of those who fall into their trap. And in the worst case the latter category may become a nuisance for all of 'the internet'. Piet
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 11:45:43AM +0200, Piet Beertema wrote:
RFC's are still Request For Comments, not Standards
You're plain wrong. Period. No matter what the title, RFC's are standards that are cast in concrete, until the time that they're superseded by a new RFC.
not all are standards. please clarify your understanding by reviewing http://www.rfc-editor.org/
Piet
--bill
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 10:28:57AM +0200, Roy Arends <roy@dnss.ec> wrote a message of 19 lines which said:
Please read RFC 2826
Please read about ORSN (http://european.nl.orsn.net/faq.php#opmode). ORSN is *not* an alternative root.
Hi, | > Please read RFC 2826 | | Please read about ORSN | (http://european.nl.orsn.net/faq.php#opmode). ORSN is *not* an | alternative root. Yes it in fact _is_ an alternative root, but the contents are the same at this time. When (if, and when) the operators of the ORSN root choose to deviate from the current ICANN-root, they can and will do so. This is a deliberate aspect of the OSRN project. I do not think this is that harmless, especially when the FAQ states ' - in our opinion - ' because that opinion may conflict with their users' opinion. It undermines DNS. groet, Pim -- Met vriendelijke groet, BIT BV / Ing P.B. van Pelt PBVP1-RIPE (PGPKEY-4DCA7E5E)
Hello, On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 12:04:33PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 10:28:57AM +0200, Roy Arends <roy@dnss.ec> wrote
Please read RFC 2826
Please read about ORSN (http://european.nl.orsn.net/faq.php#opmode). ORSN is *not* an alternative root.
if I read it correctly, ORSN *is* an alternative root, e.g. they say "However, removed TLDs won't be considered ..." in the FAQ you mentioned above, so even in the so-called "ICANN-based mode" there might be a different content of the root zone compared to the official root zone. This might get much worse in the "independent mode" since ORSN is an independent organization with no clear transparency regarding decisions and control of the root zone's content. Besides the technical reason above this is another administrative reason why I would call ORSN an alternative root. Don't get me wrong ... I don't say ICANN's decisions are transparent all or even most of the time. Some independence of Europe regarding DNS and other critical Internet infrastructure is a creditable goal, but I think it needs a stronger basis and a broader support in the ISP community than ORSN seems to have currently. -- Steffen Reithermann
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 10:28:57AM +0200, Roy Arends <roy@dnss.ec> wrote a message of 19 lines which said:
Please read RFC 2826
Please read about ORSN (http://european.nl.orsn.net/faq.php#opmode). ORSN is *not* an alternative root.
I did. It is an alternative root, since it is not sanctioned nor supported by ICANN. The main reason for the ORSN is outlined in the about page at their site. IMHO, their reasons (a lesser dependency on non-european instances of authoritative root-servers, but correct me if I'm wrong) are less valid nowadays, since some of the ICANN root-server operators chose to use anycast as a viable means to spread the load on the root-zone. f.root-servers.net: 26 sites, (5 in EU, 4 in US) i.root-servers.net: 17 sites, (11 in EU, 2 in US) j.root-servers.net: 13 sites, (3 in EU, 7 in US) k.root-servers.net: 6 sites, (5 in EU and 1 in Qatar) m.root-servers.net: 3 sites, (1 in EU) The rest of roots: 11 sites in US. In total 76 instances of a root-server of which are 25 in the EU, 26 in the US, and 50 outside EU/US. And this network is growing and growing. I can recommend any organisation who has the resources (skill and infrastructure) that would like to help to spread the load of the root-servers to contact the anycast-enabled root operators (ISC, Autonomica/Nordunet, RIPE). In comparison, there are 13 ORSN servers based in europe, of which are 2 unused, and 1 has errors. I do understand the effort ORSN is trying to make. If it is to spread load and create less dependency, they are obviously not up to par with the ICANN root-server network. If they effort is merely a political protest, that is a different layer I know nothing about. Roy
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Roy Arends wrote:
In total 76 instances of a root-server of which are 25 in the EU, 26 in the US, and 50 outside EU/US.
25 outside EU/US Roy
It is an alternative root, since it is not sanctioned nor supported by ICANN.
I can recommend any organisation who has the resources (skill and infrastructure) that would like to help to spread the load of the root-servers to contact the anycast-enabled root operators (ISC, Autonomica/Nordunet, RIPE).
several other operators are also anycasting - we don't use the ISC maintained publication page ...
ICANN root-server network.
this is a misnomer. there is no ICANN supported root server network. ICANN sactions a root-server network, but its not theirs.
Roy
--bill
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
It is an alternative root, since it is not sanctioned nor supported by ICANN.
I can recommend any organisation who has the resources (skill and infrastructure) that would like to help to spread the load of the root-servers to contact the anycast-enabled root operators (ISC, Autonomica/Nordunet, RIPE).
several other operators are also anycasting - we don't use the ISC maintained publication page ...
Names, baby, names !
ICANN root-server network.
this is a misnomer. there is no ICANN supported root server network. ICANN sactions a root-server network, but its not theirs.
icann schmicann, Your message added _zero_ to this discussion, if not mere noise, you can do better ! Roy
On 13 Oct, 2004, at 15:54, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
It is an alternative root, since it is not sanctioned nor supported by ICANN.
I can recommend any organisation who has the resources (skill and infrastructure) that would like to help to spread the load of the root-servers to contact the anycast-enabled root operators (ISC, Autonomica/Nordunet, RIPE).
several other operators are also anycasting - we don't use the ISC maintained publication page ...
You mean the ones at www.isc.org? Only F-root is reflected there. That's the only page ISC maintains. Joao
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 10:26:23PM +0200, Joao Damas wrote:
On 13 Oct, 2004, at 15:54, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
It is an alternative root, since it is not sanctioned nor supported by ICANN.
I can recommend any organisation who has the resources (skill and infrastructure) that would like to help to spread the load of the root-servers to contact the anycast-enabled root operators (ISC, Autonomica/Nordunet, RIPE).
several other operators are also anycasting - we don't use the ISC maintained publication page ...
You mean the ones at www.isc.org? Only F-root is reflected there. That's the only page ISC maintains.
Joao
who maintains www.root-servers.org? --bill
On 13 Oct, 2004, at 22:27, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 10:26:23PM +0200, Joao Damas wrote:
On 13 Oct, 2004, at 15:54, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
It is an alternative root, since it is not sanctioned nor supported by ICANN.
I can recommend any organisation who has the resources (skill and infrastructure) that would like to help to spread the load of the root-servers to contact the anycast-enabled root operators (ISC, Autonomica/Nordunet, RIPE).
several other operators are also anycasting - we don't use the ISC maintained publication page ...
You mean the ones at www.isc.org? Only F-root is reflected there. That's the only page ISC maintains.
Joao
who maintains www.root-servers.org?
Quite a few people working for several root server operators. You for instance have an account on that machine. Joao
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 11:16:02AM +0300, Yiorgos Adamopoulos <adamo@central.tee.gr> wrote a message of 13 lines which said:
So, the question is: What do you think of this effort? o any members of the group use the ORSN-SERVERS.NET root instead of the traditional one?
I use it at home (not at work and my personal opinion does not bind AFNIC and so on and so forth). It works well. I used ORSC http://www.open-rsc.org/ before which is technically... not perfect (and unresponsive). Until now, the sky did not fall, my wife did not leave the home, my bank did not block my account, I did not become deaf and the Linux server still boots.
I use it at home (not at work and my personal opinion does not bind AFNIC and so on and so forth). It works well. Until now, the sky did not fall, my wife did not leave the home, my bank did not block my account, I did not become deaf and the Linux server still boots.
Thanks for this non-exhaustive list of things that could go wrong. ;-) Piet
participants (10)
-
bmanning＠vacation.karoshi.com -
Daniel Roesen -
Jeroen Massar -
Joao Damas -
Piet Beertema -
Pim van Pelt -
Roy Arends -
Steffen Reithermann -
Stephane Bortzmeyer -
Yiorgos Adamopoulos