Claro que si Sergio, mas tarde te preparo un resumen en español y te lo envio directamente a tu direccion. Saludos Jorge On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 7:10 AM, INFO Internauta <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Español: > Estimado Jorge podrías mandar tu resumen en español para poder compartirlo > con los visitantes de nuestro portal en Argentina y los de las distintas > organizaciones de usuarios integrantes en FLUI (Federación Latinoaméricana > de Usuarios de Internet)? > Gracias de antemano! > > English: > Dear Jorge could send your resume in Spanish to share with visitors to our > website in Argentina and the various user organizations in FLUI members > (Latin American Federation of Internet users)? > Thanks in advance! > > Sergio Salinas Porto > presidente > Internauta Argentina > Asociación Argentina de Usuarios de Internet > http://www.internauta.org.ar > > > > de ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jorge Amodio" <[log in to unmask]> > To: <[log in to unmask]> > Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 12:35 AM > Subject: DNS Scaling issues > > > I received a question from Rafik that I believe interesting to share > my answer with the rest of the > NCUC crowd. > > Question from Rafik (via FB) >> >> Hi Jorge, >> >> it is plenty of lawyers here , I am not sure that they understand >> technical side. almost discussion >> are about trademark, trademark and trademark. >> wil be glad to know your feedback (technical) >> >> Rafik > > yes way too many lawyers over there. > > From the technical side, the first thing you must know is that the > three reports which are connected > are not conclusive. > > One of the reports deal with how the technology scales or not, that's > the OARC report > (Root Zone Augmentation and Impact Analysis), which shows that servers > running BIND or NSD may > be able to scale swiftly but there are some breaking points where > memory and concurrent number of > processes running on the servers could produce problems. > > There are also some issues related to server load and additional > traffic growth based on the increase in > size of the dns query responses that exceed 512 bytes due or > additional IPv6 glue records or > DNSSEC information. > > Users sending queries for which the answer will exceed 512 bytes and > are not able to receive that > response via UDP will revert to TCP, this has the side effect that now > the query has to establish > a full TCP handshake, taking more processor time/memory and additional > network traffic, this not > only will increase the delay to obtain the response but also will put > more load on the servers and > on the network. And the studies are preliminary since there is not yet > a conclusive study that shows > how the entire system will behave when DNSSEC is fully deployed. > > Also having the query being satisfied via TCP will potentially break > the use of ANYCAST as the > mechanism that enables to have replicated "mirror" root servers around > the world. > > The second report, or the "TNO Report" (by the folks from > Netherlands) only describes the model has > been used to forecast and try to put together a systematic model to > simulate the DNS root, > but it is just that a description of the model and unfortunatelly > given the short time these > guys had to do their job the report states: > "Given the time frame of the root scalability study, there was barely > time to perform scalability analysis > with the model. However, for purpose of model validation and to > illustrate typical use of the > simulation model several numerical cases were simulated." > > The last report, and most important one is the report of the Root > Scaling Study Team known > as the "Report on the Impact on the DNS Root System", which also > address many aspects > of scalability but in particular how the associated processes (like > dealing with VeriSign, IANA, > root operators, DoC, etc) scale or not. > > One of the important topics on this report (and you can talk more > about it over there with > Patrik Fältström) is that the recommendation is that we need to > introduce all these changes > to the root zone in a gradual manner and have the tools to monitor and > analyze the impact > of each change since all the previous experience has been based on the > concept that the > root zone is something in the system that has been stable and without > major changes, and > the problem is not just adding the new TLDs, is how the processes and > the overall system > will react when we are required to update/remove/change entries in the > root zone in a > more dynamic fashion with many thousands or hundreds of thousand new TLDs. > Some changes will be driven by the technology, such as DNSSEC that > will require changing > keys, signatures, etc. > > Because of the rush and pressure of the moment, many years ago we > missed the opportunity > to nail the baseline metrics and study the overal system before the > "proof of concept" TLDs > where added to the root zone. > > This is the information that now the SSAC is digesting but there is a > lot of work to do > to put together a summary report and reach a more conclusive analysis. > So far the best > advice seems to be "PROCEED WITH CAUTION". > > The lawyers need to understand that this is a real concern and not > just a trick to delay the > introduction of new gTLDs. > > Feel free to ask if you need more specifics or have any questions. > > Here are the links to the three related reports: > > Root Zone Augmentation and Impact Analysis: > http://www.icann.org/en/topics/ssr/root-zone-augementation-analysis-17sep09-en.pdf > > TNO report - Root Scaling Study > Description of the DNS Root Scaling Model: > http://www.icann.org/en/committees/dns-root/root-scaling-model-description-29sep09-en.pdf > > Scaling the Root - Report on the Impact on the DNS Root System > of Increasing the Size and Volatility of the Root Zone: > http://www.icann.org/en/committees/dns-root/root-scaling-study-report-31aug09-en.pdf > > Regards > Jorge >