- Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: Just got on this thing (perhaps very belatedly) - root server trouble?
by Jim Fleming 18 Feb '97

18 Feb '97

On Tuesday, February 18, 1997 3:09 PM, Jeffrey C. Ollie[SMTP:jeff@ollie.clive.ia.us] wrote: @ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- @ @ On Tue, 18 Feb 1997 13:01:06 -0600 (CST), karl(a)mcs.net writes: @ > @ >In fact, our solution has you *SECONDARYING* ".", which means that in @ >general, other than the requirement for you to be able to reach a source for @ >that file on a every-few-days basis (to check the SOA record) you no longer @ >NEED connectivity to the root domain. @ > @ >This is demonstrably superior; you no longer need to make that query for @ >".", as you already know who is authoritative for all the TLDs under ".". @ @ Yiiii... Having everyone secondary "." sounds demonstrably inferior to @ me. Just think what would happen if every nameserver that is @ authoritative for a .com domain started secondarying ".". There are @ approximately 50,000 name servers that are authoritative for .com @ (according to the .com zone file from the InterNIC). That would mean @ that the system ROOT-NS.MCS.NET would waste around 5 queries per @ second because those 50,000 name servers would be trying to check the @ SOA (at the time that I write this, the eDNS servers list a 3 *hour* @ refresh interval for the root zone with a 15 *minute* retry @ interval). Just think what will happen to poor ROOT-NS.MCS.NET when @ the serial number changes! @ There are really two approaches being used. Actually three if you include the current InterNIC approach of allowing some TLDs (like .COM, .NET, etc.) to be served from the Root Name Server. The two approaches could be called: 1. Secondarying 2. TRUE Root In both approaches you might want to keep in mind that the objective is to create a Root Name Server (i.e. a server for servers) as opposed to a standard ISP Name Server or a TLD Name Server that might be found in a TLD registry operation. In the first approach, Secondarying, a Root Name Server is created by taking a rather standard ISP Name Server and pulling in (via the secodarying of ".") a rather static base of information about the location of the TLD Name Servers. There are several benefits to this approach: 1. People can easily reconfigure an existing server to do this as well as other name services. 2. The zone transfer features can be used to make the update of "." easy from some central coordinator. 3. As Karl has pointed out, you mostly run with better performance because you have pulled a view of the entire TLD world in and periodically get it updated. The disadvantages are mostly philosophical in that this type of Root Name Server can end up being a jack of all trades and a master of too much or none depending on how you view it. Keep in mind that as a Root Name Server it still can be used to serve ISP Name Servers which was the objective. The second approach (TRUE Root) takes a purists view of a Root Name Server and only TLD Name Server referral information is hosted on the machine. Queries that make their way to this type of server are easily handled. A query about a .COM domain name is answered with only information on where the .COM TLD Name Servers can be found. There are several benefits to this approach: 1. The software for this type of name server is trivial and can be made to be very efficient. The role of this server is very bounded and therefore cumbersome "named" software with years of whistles and bells is not required. We have written two versions of "named" for such a server and each took little effort. One is in Perl and the other is in C. The flag-ship version will of course be in C+@. 2. The administration and operations can be made to be more robust again because the server plays a limited role and therefore there is no way that an administrator can turn this type of server into a complex multi-role server as seen today on the legacy Root Name Servers. 3. This type of server can be easily scaled and generally has very little load because it serves ISP Name Servers and they rarely need to relocate the high runner TLD Name Servers that do not move that often, especially .COM, .NET, etc. The major disadvantage of this type of server is the added cost and the fact that it makes the most sense isolated on a bullet-proof machine. Many ISPs do not have the luxury of having spare machines to throw at such problems as an experiment. The InterNIC of course just deployed 4 such machines but they have $8,000,000 per month in domain registrations to help pay for gear. In my opinion, it is good for NANOG members to understand all of the ins and out of the DNS and the various ways to configure name servers. It is not productive for people to continue to tell people that only certain individuals can understand what really amounts to a protocol and a data base and some rather trivial software to make it all work. I hope these notes help NANOG members as well as other people experimenting with the AlterNIC, Root 64, Root 128, or even the new IANA TRUE Root Name Servers....:-) -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation e-mail: JimFleming(a)unety.net JimFleming(a)unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)

1 0

RE: F means filtered ?
by Jim Fleming 18 Feb '97

18 Feb '97

On Tuesday, February 18, 1997 7:07 AM, Karl Denninger[SMTP:karl@Mcs.Net] wrote: @ > @ > > I think actually the question that Jim was asking is whether Paul filters @ > > access to the root name server he runs based on his Spam Blacklist. It @ > > seems to be a valid question. @ @ Paul wrote: @ @ > Yes, I do. I have no opinion on whether spammers should or should not be @ > able to reach any given root name server, including "mine", but for the time @ > being I lack the hardware needed to firewall f.root-servers.net differently @ > than I do the rest of my network. @ @ Uh, that is a serious issue. @ @ If you filter the root server that you run according to your "spam list", @ then you are not providing a public service on equal footing to all comers. @ @ I dislike spam and UCE as much as the next person, but I find this kind of @ policy statement and implementation abhorrent when you're talking about a @ *public* resource. @ @ If you wish to do that its fine with me, but then F.root-servers.net needs @ to be replaced by a machine which is not subject to these filters. @ @ Root servers aren't private things, expecially when you hold them out to the @ public... @ @ -- @ -- @ Karl Denninger (karl(a)MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity @ http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service @ | 99 Analog numbers, 77 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo @ Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| Email to "info(a)mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/ @ Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal @ @ Karl, Your points about private and public Root Name Servers are important for people to understand, even if they do not know how DNS works. As confirmed on this NANOG mailing list, the North American operators follow the U.S. Government's lead and use the list of Root Name Servers prepared and published by the National Science Foundation and distributed by the NSF's InterNIC. In the past, the NSF relied on volunteers to provide Root Name Servers. This is rapidly changing and Network Solutions, Inc. and the IANA recently installed 4 new TRUE Root Name Servers. The IANA and NSI are of course controlled by the NSF and there is still one year left on the NSF/NSI contract. If private individuals are allowed to make decisions about who obtains services and who does not, then the U.S. Government is responsible for those decisions if the government has endorsed (or paid) those private individuals to be the decision makers. Several people have assured me that all of these problems are being solved. I suggest that we let the proper agencies solve the problems. -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation e-mail: JimFleming(a)unety.net JimFleming(a)unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)

1 0

RE: New Root Name Servers
by Jim Fleming 18 Feb '97

18 Feb '97

On Monday, February 17, 1997 8:56 AM, Robert E. Seastrom[SMTP:rs@bifrost.seastrom.com] wrote: @ @ I have J and K in my named.ca file, but not L and M. It is reasonable @ to assume that they are not available for public use yet, as they are @ not listed in the currently-available named.root file available from @ the InterNIC. @ By the way, are you mixing TRUE Root Name Servers with legacy Root Name Servers in your root.cache ? Also, is it possible that the recent problems NANOG people have been discussing regarding Root Name Servers is really the result of these transitions to TRUE Root Name Servers ? -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation e-mail: JimFleming(a)unety.net JimFleming(a)unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)

5 4

RE: Just got on this thing (perhaps very belatedly) - root server trouble?
by Jim Fleming 18 Feb '97

18 Feb '97

On Tuesday, February 18, 1997 12:40 PM, Paul A Vixie[SMTP:paul@vix.com] wrote: @ > BTW, there are 2010-complient roots going in. And, if you secondary root @ > from us, you'll get that update automatically when it happens..... @ @ And, if you secondary "." from MCS, you will get data that only a small @ fraction of the net sees, and it will conflict with data that large portions @ of the net see, and it will conflict with other petty fiefdoms run by other @ provincial wannabes who think that THEY and not MCS ought to run/own ".". @ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- @ This is the Newdom mailing list, newdom(a)vrx.net. To subscribe or @ unsubscribe or get help , send the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" or @ "help" in the body (not subject) to newdom-request(a)vrx.net @ @ Folks, please face the facts. The U.S. Government controls the Internet. It has always been that way and it will likely always be that way. It is a resource that many people depend on and businesses are investing because of the stability, security, and opportunities that the U.S. Government provides. If you want to assemble a real "Blue Ribbon Panel" that represents the real Internet society, I suggest that you start with some or all of the people below. These are the people who control the popular Root Name Servers and are the people mandated by the people to "do the right thing". They are also some of the people supported by U.S. taxpayers dollars to make sure that federal government resources such as the Root Name Servers are used properly according to the laws in the United States. We are rapidly approaching March 1, 1997. There will be one year left on the InterNIC agreements developed by the National Science Foundation (NSF). Everyone needs to work together to make sure that those agreements remain stable for one more year and that plans are made to ensure that any transitions are smooth and do not impact the stability of the Internet. The current attempts to fragment the InterNIC are not in the best interest of the Internet. Instead, the InterNIC should be kept in tact and used as an educational model to help create additional "NICs" across the United States to spread the wealth and jobs around and to ensure better stability via distributed management. I have suggested that the NSF use the $12.6 million to help launch 49 additional NICs, one in each state except for Virginia. By March of 1998, hopefully enough NICs will be operational to allow the current InterNIC as we know it to take its place with the others as a state NIC controlled by the people of Virginia. Many people have worked hard over the past couple of years to demonstrate that cooperating and competing regional NICs can coexist. The technology is well understood and with the stewardship of some or all of the people below, I am confident that the original NSF plan to expand the NICs can be accomplished by the time the NSF agreements with AT&T and Network Solutions, Inc. end. In order to get the regional NICs up to speed, I suggest that states follow the NSF InterNIC model and "ousource" the work to regional companies that have demonstrated their expertise in not only Internet technology but also the emerging registry industry. I suggest that these companies work with their state governments to gain support to work with the elected officials below to get things moving. There is only one year left. Time is getting short. Rather than have anyone rush into dismantling the InterNIC why not join together to clone the InterNIC, not once, but at least 49 times to help the Internet grow. Once this is demonstrated, then obviously the lessons learned will help fuel international growth. No one will be left out. If other countries want to join in this effort, I suggest that they follow a similar plan. Think global but start local. It is the only way that you will make any real progress. I am sure that many people in the U.S. will be glad to lend a hand to get things moving. Hopefully, there will be many examples and more educational programs developed as these efforts unfold. There is no reason why anyone should be left out but there is also no reason why people should hold back waiting for people to catch up. With the clock ticking and $12.6 million in the bank, it is time to duplicate the prototype in Virginia in every state and each country. It is not time to dismantle the prototype. If that occurs then much of the knowledge will be lost and the money the U.S. taxpayers spent to build the InterNIC will be wasted. Again, the following people have the mandate of the people to make sure that money and the efforts are not wasted. They work daily to maximize the return on the taxpayer's investment. Let them know that you want to work with them to make sure you also benefit from those efforts in your states and countries. Thank you for your time... @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore http://www.whitehouse.gov National Science Board (NSB) http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/nsb.htm The NSB has dual responsibilities as: . National science policy advisor to the President and the Congress . Governing body for the National Science Foundation Chairman NSB - Dr. Richard N. Zare, Stanford University rnz(a)chemistry.stanford.edu http://www-leland.stanford.edu/group/Zarelab/ Office of Inspector General of the NSF (also links to Congress) http://www.nsf.gov/oig/oig.htm Inspector General - Linda G. Sundro - lsundro(a)nsf.gov Investigator - Clara Kuehn - ckuehn(a)nsf.gov National Science Foundation Neal Lane - nlane(a)nsf.gov <http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/forum/lane/quscipol.htm> Juris Hartmanis - jhartman(a)nsf.gov <http://www.cise.nsf.gov/oad/jhartman.html> George Strawn - gstrawn(a)nsf.gov <http://www.cise.nsf.gov/ncri/Georgehome.html> Don Mitchell - dmitchel(a)nsf.gov <http://www.cise.nsf.gov/ncri/Donhome.html> ===== @@@@@ http://www.fnc.gov/mission.html "The FNC supports the goals of the CIC, particularly those related to building the national information infrastructure (NII). It also seeks to address Federal technology transition goals and allow the operational experiences of FNC agencies to influence future Federal research agendas. It also contributes funds to important Internet infrastructure organizations, such as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA), and the Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT)." @@@@@ http://www.fnc.gov/FNC_Members.html Federal Networking Council George Strawn - Chairman GSTRAWN(a)NSF.GOV Walter Wiebe - Executive Director WWIEBE(a)NSF.GOV Bruce Almich ALMICH.BRUCE(a)EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV Bruce Bottomley BBB(a)ROMULUS.NCSC.MIL Dick desJardins DESJARDI(a)EOS.NASA.GOV Frank Hartel HARTEL(a)BOX-H.NIH.GOV Craig Hunt CHUNT(a)NIST.GOV Pamela G. Kruzic PJK(a)NRC.GOV Henry Lai HENRY.LAI(a)GSA.GOV Fred Lee FLEE(a)NSF.GOV Fred Long FLONG(a)SUN1.WWB.NOAA.GOV Hilarie Orman HORMAN(a)DARPA.MIL Camillo J. Pasquariello PASQUARC(a)NCR.DISA.MIL Alexis Poliakoff ALEX_POLIAKOFF(a)ED.GOV Ken Roko KROKO(a)USAID.GOV Elaine Stout ESTOUT(a)USGS.GOV @@@@@ http://www.fnc.gov/FNCAC.html The Federal Networking Council Advisory Committee (FNCAC) is chartered by the National Science Foundation to provide the FNC with technical, tactical, and strategic advice from the constituencies involved in the NREN Program..." FNCAC Members Dr. Sidney Karin KARIN(a)SDSC.EDU Dr. George Brandenburg BRANDENBURG(a)HUHEPL.HARVARD.EDU Dr. Henriette Avram AVRAM(a)IVORY.EDUCOM.EDU Mr. Jim Beall, Jr. BEALL(a)VNET.IBM.COM Mr. Alan Blatecky ALANB(a)MCNC.ORG Mr. Matt Blaze MAB(a)RESEARCH.ATT.COM Ms. Susan Estrada SESTRADA(a)ALDEA.COM Dr. Kenneth S. Flamm FLAMM(a)BROOK.EDU Dr. John Gage JOHN.GAGE(a)ENG.SUN.COM Ms. Carol Henderson CCH(a)ALAWASH.ORG Dr. Kenneth J. Klingenstein KJK(a)SPOT.COLORADO.EDU Mr. Richard Liebhaber 2714743(a)MCIMAIL.COM Mr. Stu Loken SCLOKEN(a)LBL.GOV Dr. Paul Mockapetris PVM(a)SOFTWARE.COM Mr. Robert G. Moskowitz RGM3(a)IS.CHRYSLER.COM Dr. Ike Nassi NASSI(a)SCRUZNET.COM Mr. Carl Edward Oliver OLIVERCE(a)ORNL.GOV Dr. Stewart Personick SDP(a)BELLCORE.COM Mr. Thomas C. Rindfleisch THOMAS_RINDFLEISCH(a)MEDMAIL.STANFORD.EDU. Mr. Mike Roberts ROBERTS(a)EDUCOM.EDU Ms. Connie D. Stout CSTOUT(a)TENET.EDU Brigadier General Harold Thompson THOMPSON(a)ICN.STATE.IA.US Dr. Stephen Wolff SWOLFF(a)CISCO.COM @@@@@ U.S. Senate e-mail addresses Alabama - Shelby, Richard C. (R) - senator(a)shelby.senate.gov Alaska - Stevens, Ted (R) - senator_stevens(a)stevens.senate.gov Arizona - Kyl, Jon (R) - info(a)kyl.senate.gov Arizona - McCain, John (R) - senator_mccain(a)mccain.senate.gov Arkansas - Bumpers, Dale (D) - senator(a)bumpers.senate.gov Arkansas - Hutchinson, Tim (D) - senator.hutchinson(a)hutchinson.senate.gov California - Boxer, Barbara (D) - senator(a)boxer.senate.gov California - Feinstein, Dianne (D) - senator(a)feinstein.senate.gov Connecticut - Dodd, Christopher J. (D) - sen_dodd(a)dodd.senate.gov Connecticut - Lieberman, Joseph I. (D) - senator_lieberman(a)lieberman.senate.gov Delaware - Biden, Joseph R., Jr. (D) - senator(a)biden.senate.gov Florida - Graham, Bob (D) - bob_graham(a)graham.senate.gov Georgia - Coverdell, Paul (R) - senator_coverdell(a)coverdell.senate.gov Hawaii - Inouye, Daniel K. (D) - senator(a)inouye.senate.gov Idaho - Craig, Larry E. (R) - larry_craig(a)craig.senate.gov Idaho - Kempthorne, Dirk (R) - dirk_kempthorne(a)kempthorne.senate.gov Illinois - Moseley-Braun, Carol (D) - senator(a)moseley-braun.senate.gov Iowa - Grassley, Chuck (R) - chuck_grassley(a)grassley.senate.gov Iowa - Harkin, Tom (D) - tom_harkin(a)harkin.senate.gov Kansas - Brownback, Sam (R) - sam_brownback(a)brownback.senate.gov Kentucky - Ford, Wendell H. (D) - wendell_ford(a)ford.senate.gov Kentucky - McConnell, Mitch (R) - senator(a)mcconnell.senate.gov Louisiana - Breaux, John B. (D) - senator(a)breaux.senate.gov Maine - Collins, Susan (R) - senator(a)collins.senate.gov Maine - Snowe, Olympia J. (R) - olympia(a)snowe.senate.gov Maryland - Mikulski, Barbara A. (D) - senator(a)mikulski.senate.gov Maryland - Sarbanes, Paul S. (D) - senator(a)sarbanes.senate.gov Massachusetts - Kennedy, Edward M. (D) - senator(a)kennedy.senate.gov Massachusetts - Kerry, John F. (D) - john_kerry(a)kerry.senate.gov Michigan - Abraham, Spencer (R) - michigan(a)abraham.senate.gov Michigan - Levin, Carl (D) senator(a)levin.senate.gov Minnesota - Grams, Rod (R) - mail_grams(a)grams.senate.gov Minnesota - Wellstone, Paul D. (D) - senator(a)wellstone.senate.gov Mississippi - Cochran, Thad (R) - senator(a)cochran.senate.gov Missouri - Ashcroft, John (R) - john_ashcroft(a)ashcroft.senate.gov Missouri - Bond, Christopher S. (R) - kit_bond(a)bond.senate.gov Montana - Baucus, Max (D) - max(a)baucus.senate.gov Montana - Burns, Conrad R. (R) - conrad_burns(a)burns.senate.gov Nebraska - Kerrey, J. Robert (D) - bob(a)kerrey.senate.gov Nevada - Bryan, Richard H. (D) - senator(a)bryan.senate.gov Nevada - Reid, Harry (D) - senator_reid(a)reid.senate.gov New Hampshire - Gregg, Judd (R) - mailbox(a)gregg.senate.gov New Hampshire - Smith, Bob (R) opinion(a)smith.senate.gov New Jersey - Lautenberg, Frank R. (D) - frank_lautenberg(a)lautenberg.senate.gov New Mexico - Bingaman, Jeff (D) - senator_bingaman(a)bingaman.senate.gov New Mexico - Domenici, Pete V. (R) - senator_domenici(a)domenici.senate.gov New York - D'Amato, Alfonse M. (R) - senator_al(a)damato.senate.gov New York - Moynihan, Daniel Patrick (D) - senator(a)dpm.senate.gov North Carolina - Faircloth, Lauch (R) - senator(a)faircloth.senate.gov North Carolina - Helms, Jesse (R) - jesse_helms(a)helms.senate.gov North Dakota - Dorgan, Byron L. (D) - senator(a)dorgan.senate.gov Ohio - DeWine, Mike (R) - senator_dewine(a)dewine.senate.gov Oklahoma - Nickles, Don (R) - senator(a)nickles.senate.gov Oregon - Wyden, Ron (D) - senator(a)wyden.senate.gov Pennsylvania - Santorum, Rick (R) - senator(a)santorum.senate.gov Pennsylvania - Specter, Arlen (R) - senator_specter(a)specter.senate.gov Rhode Island - Chafee, John H. (R) - senator_chafee(a)chafee.senate.gov South Carolina - Hollings, Ernest F. (D) - senator(a)hollings.senate.gov South Carolina - Thurmond, Strom (R) - senator(a)thurmond.senate.gov South Dakota - Daschle, Thomas A. (D) - tom_daschle(a)daschle.senate.gov Tennessee - Frist, William H. (R) - senator_frist(a)frist.senate.gov Tennessee - Thompson, Fred (R) - senator_thompson(a)thompson.senate.gov Texas - Hutchison, Kay Bailey (R) - senator(a)hutchison.senate.gov Utah - Bennett, Robert F. (R) - senator(a)bennett.senate.gov Utah - Hatch, Orrin G. (R) - senator_hatch(a)hatch.senate.gov Vermont - Jeffords, James M. (R) - vermont(a)jeffords.senate.gov Vermont - Leahy, Patrick J. (D) - senator_leahy(a)leahy.senate.gov Virginia - Robb, Charles S. (D) senator(a)robb.senate.gov Virginia - Warner, John W. (R) - senator(a)warner.senate.gov Washington - Gorton, Slade (R) - senator_gorton(a)gorton.senate.gov Washington - Murray, Patty (D) - senator_murray(a)murray.senate.gov West Virginia - Byrd, Robert C. (D) - senator_byrd(a)byrd.senate.gov West Virginia - Rockefeller, John D., IV (D) - senator(a)rockefeller.senate.gov Wisconsin - Feingold, Russell D. (D) - senator(a)feingold.senate.gov Wisconsin - Kohl, Herb (D) - nator_kohl(a)kohl.senate.gov Wyoming - Enzi, Mike (R) - senator(a)enzi.senate.gov Wyoming - Thomas, Craig (R) - craig(a)thomas.senate.gov @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ U.S. GOVERNMENT (NSF, etc.) Contact: Dr. George Strawn Division Director Division of Networking and Communication Research and Infrastructure National Science Foundation 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 1175 Arlington, VA 22230 Phone: (703) 306-1950 Fax: (703) 306-0621 Email: gstrawn(a)nsf.gov http://www.cise.nsf.gov/ncri/Georgehome.html NS.INTERNIC.NET 198.41.0.4 Network Solutions, Inc. (NS45-HST) AOS.ARL.ARMY.MIL 128.63.2.53 Army Research Laboratory (BRL-AOS) NS.NASA.GOV 192.203.230.10 Moffett Field (NS-NASA) NS.NIC.DDN.MIL 192.112.36.4 GSI (DIIS-NS) STATE UNIVERSITIES NS1.ISI.EDU 128.9.0.107 University of Southern California (ISI2) Contact: Dr. Stephen B. Sample President ADM 110 University of Southern California University Park, mc-0012 Los Angeles, CA 90089-0012 (213) 740-2111 http://www.usc.edu/cgi-bin/uscinfo/directory-2?STAF+6630 http://www.usc.edu/People/snailmail.html TERP.UMD.EDU 128.8.10.90 University of Maryland (UMD-TERP) Contact: Dr. William E. Kirwan President, University of Maryland at College Park <http://www.inform.umd.edu:8080/CampusInfo/Departments/PRES/> <http://inform.umd.edu/kirwan-biography.html> Legal Affairs Dr. J. Terrance Roach <mailto: troach(a)deans.umd.edu> U.S. PRIVATE INDUSTRY & INDIVIDUALS C.PSI.NET 192.33.4.12 Performance Systems International Inc. (C-NYSER) Contact: PSINet, Inc (PSI-NET-DOM) 510 Huntmar Park Drive Herndon, VA 22070 USA NS.ISC.ORG 192.5.5.241 Internet Software Consortium (ISC) Contact: Internet Software Consortium (ISC2-DOM) c/o UUNET Communications Services 3110 Fairview Park Drive Suite 570 Falls Church, VA 22042 Domain Name: ISC.ORG SWEDEN Contact: (See below) NIC.NORDU.NET 192.36.148.17 [No name] (NORDU) @@@@@@ SERVER NS.ISC.ORG 192.5.5.241 Internet Software Consortium (ISC) Hostname: F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET Address: 192.5.5.241 System: DEC ALPHA running BIND 4.9.5 Host Administrator: Vixie, Paul (PV15) paul(a)VIX.COM +1 415 747 0204 Domain Server Record last updated on 09-Oct-96. ------- SERVER NS.INTERNIC.NET 198.41.0.4 Network Solutions, Inc. (NS45-HST) 505 Huntmar Park Drive Herndon, VA 22070 Hostname: A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET Address: 198.41.0.4 System: SUN running SUNOS Host Administrator: Kosters, Mark A. (MAK21) markk(a)NETSOL.COM (703) 742-4795 (FAX) (703) 742-4811 Record last updated on 31-Aug-95. ------- SERVER NS1.ISI.EDU 128.9.0.107 University of Southern California (ISI2) Information Sciences Institute 4676 Admiralty Way Marina del Rey, CA 90292 Hostname: B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET Address: 128.9.0.107 System: ? running ? Host Administrator: Koda, Jim (JK7) koda(a)ISI.EDU 310) 822-1511 Record last updated on 12-Aug-95. ------- SERVER TERP.UMD.EDU 128.8.10.90 University of Maryland (UMD-TERP) Computer Science Center College Park, MD 20742 Hostname: D.ROOT-SERVERS.NET Address: 128.8.10.90 System: MICROVAX-II running UNIX Coordinator: Sneeringer, Gerry (GS307) sneeri(a)NI.UMD.EDU (301) 405-2996 domain server Record last updated on 12-Aug-95. ------- SERVER AOS.ARL.ARMY.MIL 128.63.2.53 Army Research Laboratory (BRL-AOS) Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5066 Hostname: H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET Address: 128.63.2.53 System: SUN running UNIX Host Administrator: Fielding, James L. (JLF) jamesf(a)ARL.MIL (410)278-8929 (DSN) 298-8929 (410)278-6664 (FAX) (410)278-5077 domain server Record last updated on 17-Aug-95. ------- SERVER C.PSI.NET 192.33.4.12 Performance Systems International Inc. (C-NYSER) Hostname: C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET Address: 192.33.4.12 System: SUN running UNIX Coordinator: Administration, PSINet Domain (PDA4) psinet-domain-admin(a)PSI.COM (703) 904-4100 domain server Record last updated on 17-Apr-96. ------- SERVER NIC.NORDU.NET 192.36.148.17 [No name] (NORDU) Hostname: I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET Address: 192.36.148.17 System: SUN-4/60 running UNIX Coordinator: Rendahl, Matti [President] (MR164) matti(a)COMEDIA.SE +46 8 612 49 26 +46 70 533 13 56 (FAX) +46 8 612 49 36 Record last updated on 24-Aug-95. ------- SERVER NS.NASA.GOV 192.203.230.10 Moffett Field (NS-NASA) NASA Ames Research Center, Mail Stop 233-8 Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000 USA Hostname: E.ROOT-SERVERS.NET Address: 192.203.230.10 System: SUN running SUNOS Host Administrator, Coordinator: Schlapfer, Marcel (MS4039) marcel(a)NSIPO.NASA.GOV 1-415-604-0955 (FAX) 1-415-604-0036 domain server Record last updated on 25-Oct-96. ------- SERVER NS.NIC.DDN.MIL 192.112.36.4 GSI (DIIS-NS) Suite 200 14200 Park Meadow Dr. Chantilly, VA 22021 Hostname: G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET Address: 192.112.36.4 System: SUN running UNIX Coordinator: McCollum, Robert W. (RM584) bobm(a)NIC.DDN.MIL (703) 802-8476 (FAX) (703) 802-8376 Root Domain Server Record last updated on 18-Aug-95. ------- -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation e-mail: JimFleming(a)unety.net JimFleming(a)unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)

1 0

Address of Westin building in Seattle?
by ALAN DORN HETZEL JR 18 Feb '97

18 Feb '97

Does anybody have this address and/or prefix handy? Thanks! -Dorn

3 3

RE: New Root Name Servers
by Jim Fleming 18 Feb '97

18 Feb '97

On Tuesday, February 18, 1997 4:16 AM, Brian Tackett[SMTP:cym@acrux.net] wrote: @ On Mon, 17 Feb 1997, Jim Fleming wrote: @ <snip> @ @ I don't see what this "debate" has to do with North American Network @ *Operation*, as opposed to politics :P @ @ Brian, I would think that the members of NANOG would understand that the Root Name Servers they use are critical to their operations. This is especially true if several people on the NANOG list report that they are having operational problems with the Root Name Servers. As a "group", you might want to consider the following questions... 1. Do NANOG members all support one confederation of Root Name Servers ? 2. Have NANOG members converted to the NEW TRUE Root Name Servers ? 3. Are NANOG members mixing legacy Root Name Servers with entries for the NEW TRUE Root Name Servers ? 4. Is NANOG as a group working with the U.S. Government and the National Science Foundation (NSF) on a transition plan for the NSF/InterNIC now that we are approaching the last 12 months of that contract period ? 5. Does NANOG support any Root Name Servers ? If so, are those TRUE Root Name Servers that meet IETF RFC recommendations ? 6. Do NANOG members use any common network management software to make sure that the Root Name Servers they use are in synch, are checked regularly, are coherent, etc. ? 7. Does NANOG have a transition plan to IPv6 and does it address Root Name Servers using IPv6 addressing ? 8. Does NANOG sponsor any educational programs for any or all of the above ? P.S. NANOG's address is "nanog" not "nanon"... -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation e-mail: JimFleming(a)unety.net JimFleming(a)unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)

1 0

RE: Major Global Telecommunications Firm Runs the ALTERNIC root.db!
by Jim Fleming 18 Feb '97

18 Feb '97

On Monday, February 17, 1997 9:20 AM, Karl Denninger[SMTP:karl@Mcs.Net] wrote: @ > @ > Well, folks, in spite of the claim by Perry, Don and crew that Alternic @ > is going nowhere, it seems that GTE (thats correct, the telco giant) @ > has at least a little faith in Alternic root.db! @ > @ @ Confirmed. @ @ Cthulu:${PWD##}> dig ns . @pooh.netops.gtefsd.com @ Yes folks...I think that all of the education that people have been providing is paying off with the "big boys" and I do not mean the large human types. I suggest that everyone continue to focus on the round table. Dot is in the center of the table. The U.S. Government will want (and deserves) a seat (or a couple seats) at the table. There are places for many participants. The IANA and Network Solutions, Inc. are trying to keep up with the pace that you are setting. They have finally deployed some TRUE Root Name Servers. People claim that the NSF should be all about science and research. It is interesting that the leading edge research is now being done in the private sector and the NSF dollars are funding people to be registration bookeepers and clerks. Hopefully, this last situation can be turned around over the next year. As more and more registries are created as clones of the InterNIC the NSF can transition back to the world of science and research. We need to move forward. People need to focus on the issues of IN-ADDR.ARPA and begin moving those delegations to regional registries operated by commercial companies. One of the "big boys" recently told me that they are willing to donate their /8 to the cause of Internet registry progress. If that starts to occur, then we can open up all of these IP address allocation issues and allow ISPs to grow without InterNIC interference. There is much work to do.... -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation e-mail: JimFleming(a)unety.net JimFleming(a)unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)

3 2

RE: Major Global Telecommunications Firm Runs the ALTERNIC root.db!
by sthaug＠nethelp.no 18 Feb '97

18 Feb '97

> @ > Well, folks, in spite of the claim by Perry, Don and crew that Alternic > @ > is going nowhere, it seems that GTE (thats correct, the telco giant) > @ > has at least a little faith in Alternic root.db! > > Yes folks...I think that all of the education that people > have been providing is paying off with the "big boys" > and I do not mean the large human types. I assume you are referring to these name servers: gtefsd.com. 172800 NS KANGA.NETOPS.gtefsd.com. gtefsd.com. 172800 NS ROO.NETOPS.gtefsd.com. gtefsd.com. 172800 NS WLV.IIPO.GTEGSC.COM. gtefsd.com. 172800 NS POOH.NETOPS.gtefsd.com. It would seem that the GTE folks have changed their mind. All these name servers now report [a-j].root-servers.net as the name servers for ".". Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug(a)nethelp.no

1 0

Re: Unsubstantiated Rumor - this is not simply about RBOC ISP Tariff
by salo＠msc.edu 18 Feb '97

18 Feb '97

> a) The "free peering" relationship is directly analogous to a "bill & > keep" interconnection relationship between traditional telephone companies. I suspect that "directly analogous" is neither a legal nor a regulatory term. > b) Under the Communications Act of 1934 As amended by the Telecommunications > Act of 1996 ("Act"), "telecommunications carriers" are under obligation to > interconnect "with the facilities and equipment of other telecommunications > carriers..." (Act, Sec. 251 (a) (1) It may be worth your while to learn what a "telecommunications carrier" is. (I rather doubt that you are one. I also rather doubt that the people you want to peer with are either.) The telecomreg mail list might be a useful place for you to explore this topic. -tjs

3 3

Unsubstantiated Rumor
by James R. Fisher 18 Feb '97

18 Feb '97

What appears below is an unsubstantiated rumor, but some rumors are true... -jrf ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >Return-Path: bbb(a)acm.org >Date: Sat, 8 Feb 97 16:41:22 EST >To: fnc(a)web1.hpc.org, lsn(a)hpcc.gov >From: "Bruce B. Bottomley" <bbb(a)acm.org> >Subject: Fw: Telephone charges for Internet > > >Does anybody know if there's truth in this one? The concept doesn't sound >extraordinarily unlikely given the info we received from the FCC rep at FNC >a few months back about central office loading, allocation of costs and >revenues, etc., but the lack of publicity associated with this--if true--is >a bit surprising. > >>Subject: Fwd: Telephone charges for Internet >> >>>I am writing you this to inform you >>>of a very important matter currently under review by the FCC. Your local >>>telephone company has filed a proposal with the FCC to impose per minute >>>charges for your internet service. They contend that your usage has or will >>>hinder the operation of the telephone network. It is my belief that >>>internet usage will diminish if users were required to pay additional per >>>minute charges. The FCC has created an email box for your comments, >>>responses must be received by February 13, 1997. Send your comments to >>>isp(a)fcc.gov and tell them what you think. Every phone company is >>>in on this one, and they are trying to sneak it in just under the wire for >>>litigation. Let everyone you know hear this one. Get the e-mail address to >>>everyone you can think of. >>> >>>isp(a)fcc.gov

7 8