RE: Root zone change -- d.gtld-servers.net
What part of 'TLD' don't you understand? He's talking about a change to the root zone of the entire DNS for the three most widely-used TLDs. That's information any responsible operator would like to be apprised of in advance of the referenced change. ----------------------------------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@netmore.net> // 818.535.5024 voice Effective zone serial number 2000091901, f.root-servers.net (192.5.5.241) will no longer be in the list as authoritative for com, net, org. In its place d.gtld-servers.net (208.206.240.5) will be added as an authoritative server for com, net, org. The new set of servers authoritative for these TLDs will be: A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 198.41.0.4 G.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 198.41.3.101 E.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 207.200.81.69 F.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 198.17.208.67 D.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 208.206.240.5 J.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 198.41.0.21 K.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 195.8.99.11 A.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 198.41.3.38 M.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 210.176.152.18 C.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 205.188.185.18 I.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 192.36.144.133 B.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 203.181.106.5 -----Original Message----- From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy@psg.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 6:00 PM To: rdobbins@netmore.net Cc: jhawk@bbnplanet.com; bverd@netsol.com; nanog@merit.edu Subject: RE: Root zone change -- d.gtld-servers.net
In this particular case, I can see where information about root nameserver changes might be of use in figuring out broken name resolution due to caching issues, etc.
indeed! but these date are not about root nameservers. randy
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 06:47:29PM -0700, rdobbins@netmore.net wrote:
What part of 'TLD' don't you understand?
He's talking about a change to the root zone of the entire DNS for the three most widely-used TLDs. That's information any responsible operator would like to be apprised of in advance of the referenced change.
Do you have statistics to back up the 'three most widely-used TLDs' statement? According to www.netsizer.com, org isn't even in the top ten. I'm not sure upon what they base their data, but I was unable to find evidence to the contrary. Austin
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Austin Schutz wrote:
Do you have statistics to back up the 'three most widely-used TLDs' statement?
According to www.netsizer.com, org isn't even in the top ten. I'm not sure upon what they base their data, but I was unable to find evidence to the contrary.
</pointless pedantry> Hearing anything from netsol before they try to break stuff is both novel and (personally speaking) quite welcome, particularly given the grief they've been given for staying silent about everything in the past. Makes a pleasant change from bitching about ORBS, anyway. -- Patrick Evans - Sysadmin, bran addict and couch potato pre at pre dot org www.pre.org/pre
On Thu, Sep 21, 2000 at 09:30:01AM +0100, Patrick Evans wrote:
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Austin Schutz wrote:
Do you have statistics to back up the 'three most widely-used TLDs' statement?
According to www.netsizer.com, org isn't even in the top ten. I'm not sure upon what they base their data, but I was unable to find evidence to the contrary.
</pointless pedantry>
Hearing anything from netsol before they try to break stuff is both novel and (personally speaking) quite welcome, particularly given the grief they've been given for staying silent about everything in the past.
Makes a pleasant change from bitching about ORBS, anyway.
And anything with IANAL anywhere in the message body. My point was that assuming that org is the third largest TLD reinforces the u.s.-centric belief that the non-u.s. world is insignificant with respect to domain usage. Austin p.s. yes I'm aware this message body contains IANAL.
What's wrong with being U.S.-centric? While use of the net is growing in other countries, the U.S. is still the place where the most traffic originates/terminates, and since this is the *North American* list, it stands to reason that issues in the U.S. portion of the system will get more play here. No, I don't have any statistics,and I'm too lazy to go suss around for them - maybe .edu is higher than .org. .com & .net are definitely the top two, though. Austin Schutz wrote:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2000 at 09:30:01AM +0100, Patrick Evans wrote:
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Austin Schutz wrote:
Do you have statistics to back up the 'three most widely-used TLDs' statement?
According to www.netsizer.com, org isn't even in the top ten. I'm not sure upon what they base their data, but I was unable to find evidence to the contrary.
</pointless pedantry>
Hearing anything from netsol before they try to break stuff is both novel and (personally speaking) quite welcome, particularly given the grief they've been given for staying silent about everything in the past.
Makes a pleasant change from bitching about ORBS, anyway.
And anything with IANAL anywhere in the message body. My point was that assuming that org is the third largest TLD reinforces the u.s.-centric belief that the non-u.s. world is insignificant with respect to domain usage.
Austin
p.s. yes I'm aware this message body contains IANAL.
-- ------------------------------------------------------------ Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@netmore.net> // 818.535.5024 voice
We're talking about -network issues- on the *North American* list. Last I heard, Verio were headquartered in Colorado, not Ho Chi Minh City. Of course, if you're so jaded with the U.S., I'm sure they'd be glad to welcome someone of your talents, there. Randy Bush wrote:
What's wrong with being U.S.-centric?
jingism kinda went out of fashion shortly after the us's defeat in viet nam
randy
-- ------------------------------------------------------------ Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@netmore.net> // 818.535.5024 voice
Anybody know of a filter I can configure to prevent these puerile "America, Love it or Leave it" rants from clogging my already full inbox? I thought this list was a forum for *operational issues* in *North America*, not for pissing matches between conflicting views of world geography. Geoff Zinderdine
Last I heard, Verio were headquartered in Colorado, not Ho Chi Minh City. Of course, if you're so jaded with the U.S., I'm sure they'd be glad to welcome someone of your talents, there.
Last I heard, Verio were headquartered in Colorado, not Ho Chi Minh City. Of course, if you're so jaded with the U.S., I'm sure they'd be glad to welcome someone of your talents, there.
still think it's 1952, eh? <plonk!>
The point I was trying to make - and which I'm sure that you understood, but simply chose to ignore - is that it's not a Bad Thing to be somewhat U.S.-centric when discussing technical issues on the North American Network Operator's Group list. *Technical issues*. I could care less about your juvenile political beliefs, nor, I suspect, do the vast majority of subscribers to this list. It's sad that you've so much trouble distinguishing between the two. Your personal animus and general obnoxiousness are surprising, given your c.v. and and the position of responsibility you hold within Verio. It will be interesting to learn how their P.R. department respond to questions concerning your penchant for injecting political commentary into an unmistakably -technical- forum, all the while in your official guise as an officer of said company. Randy Bush wrote:
Last I heard, Verio were headquartered in Colorado, not Ho Chi Minh City. Of course, if you're so jaded with the U.S., I'm sure they'd be glad to welcome someone of your talents, there.
still think it's 1952, eh?
<plonk!>
-- ------------------------------------------------------------ Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@netmore.net> // 818.535.5024 voice
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@netmore.net> wrote:
The point I was trying to make - and which I'm sure that you understood, but simply chose to ignore - is that it's not a Bad Thing to be somewhat U.S.-centric when discussing technical issues on the North American Network Operator's Group list.
Am I the only one who thinks there are more countries in North America than the US? -w
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@netmore.net> wrote:
The point I was trying to make - and which I'm sure that you understood, but simply chose to ignore - is that it's not a Bad Thing to be somewhat U.S.-centric when discussing technical issues on the North American Network Operator's Group list.
Am I the only one who thinks there are more countries in North America than the US?
I don't think California counts. :_) Deepak
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Randy Bush wrote:
Last I heard, Verio were headquartered in Colorado, not Ho Chi Minh City. Of course, if you're so jaded with the U.S., I'm sure they'd be glad to welcome someone of your talents, there.
still think it's 1952, eh?
-------------------------^^ Blame it on Canada :-)
<plonk!>
wfms
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Randy Bush wrote:
What's wrong with being U.S.-centric?
jingism kinda went out of fashion shortly after the us's defeat in viet nam
randy
Randy, Please, don't go LOOKING for non-operational debates! --- John Fraizer 2nd Force RECON USMC
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Austin Schutz wrote:
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 06:47:29PM -0700, rdobbins@netmore.net wrote:
What part of 'TLD' don't you understand?
He's talking about a change to the root zone of the entire DNS for the three most widely-used TLDs. That's information any responsible operator would like to be apprised of in advance of the referenced change.
Do you have statistics to back up the 'three most widely-used TLDs' statement?
According to www.netsizer.com, org isn't even in the top ten. I'm not sure upon what they base their data, but I was unable to find evidence to the contrary.
Austin
Come on. You're not actually going to debate this and call it "operational content" are you? --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
participants (11)
-
Austin Schutz -
Austin Schutz -
Deepak Jain -
Geoffrey Zinderdine -
John Fraizer -
Patrick Evans -
Randy Bush -
rdobbins＠netmore.net -
Roland Dobbins
-
William F. Maton -
ww＠pandora.styx.org