[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       namedroppers
Subject:    Re: [dnsext] all .gov do=1 nxdomain answers already appear to be
From:       Doug Barton <dougb () dougbarton ! us>
Date:       2009-08-23 4:54:31
Message-ID: 4A90CB87.1080502 () dougbarton ! us
[Download RAW message or body]

Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <4A8B8AEE.1040105@dougbarton.us>, Doug Barton writes:
>> bert hubert wrote:
>>
>>> This, however, is not the point; we are not dealing with a 'clean
>>> network'. We are dealing with a network ('The Internet') that saw a
>>> 600-fold increase in TCP traffic, which should not have happened.
>> I asked in passing for references to this claim, now I'm asking directly.
>>
>> Doug
> 
> The traffic went from .1 connects/second to 60 connections/second compared
> to 6000 UDP requests/second.

Whose traffic? I assume we're talking about ORG? Where is this documented?

Meanwhile, we're losing sleep because 1% of connections/second are now
happening over TCP? Has anyone from Afilias actually said that there
is a problem here? Do any other sites anticipate a problem if 1% (or
even *gasp* 2%) of their connections are TCP?

I've already stated my support for wanting to see something "better"
than we have now for making sure that EDNS is going to work, and I'm
sorry if I'm being dense but I don't see that this problem justifies
the amount of drama we've seen on the list so far.


Doug (as always hoping to be enlightened if I'm wrong)

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]