Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>]

Joe,

On 2008-07-08 14:55, Joe Abley wrote:
...
> I'm not suggesting that growth should be allowed to happen without
> considering the teFrom ietf-bounces at ietf.org  Mon Jul  7 20:48:58 2008
Return-Path: <ietf-bounces at ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive at megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive at core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03C8F3A68D1;
	Mon,  7 Jul 2008 20:48:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf at core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf at core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 927913A6887
	for <ietf at core3.amsl.com>; Mon,  7 Jul 2008 20:48:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.137
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.137 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.462, 
	BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
	by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id yWNkXtTxG2d5 for <ietf at core3.amsl.com>;
	Mon,  7 Jul 2008 20:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wa-out-1112.google.com [209.85.146.176])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F395E3A681C
	for <ietf at ietf.org>; Mon,  7 Jul 2008 20:48:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k34so1841521wah.25
	for <ietf at ietf.org>; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 20:49:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from
	:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references
	:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=Iu+A6RAo7rDsfBMsz1MIQsVXPw0whzs4AOj6iN1/ynI=;
	b=GUfte1G5B4Cuq0TZqu0s5IwwlrACj1XectxXCiV6AC43XHc2dnK7ysygjVwBB2akfj
	trDJ9PLvfwoBAttJB4SJQ+J2NCG5SpifE0OCjkxDhTa3ldVeBKpgqiMhxduCvYrJMpnJ
	0/QOn6b06mUEG5XNDEOsxx9zhVLPMUJ3CxQTA=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc
	:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding;
	b=tvRmBK82+qePlS+lP9SEk4fJzMyZzTXf98mbN/RUH/rI2CGgqyQ0zZ3c4sxy+PKbDB
	3YwopSEDQ1u2hl4x+PNtiQ8wCOq++j0sCV1dsOO0BUmedR4F4dFGiWLu1zNaTUJ7NLyo
	e1W5MN/Lk2lCcFgAE+p7BxRsYPAKvby68e8fk=
Received: by 10.114.205.1 with SMTP id c1mr7331976wag.56.1215488942813;
	Mon, 07 Jul 2008 20:49:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?10.1.1.4? ( [118.93.5.148])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k24sm7947598waf.33.2008.07.07.20.49.00
	(version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 07 Jul 2008 20:49:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4872E3A7.9070705 at gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 15:48:55 +1200
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Joe Abley <jabley at ca.afilias.info>
Subject: Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?
References: <200807022323.m62NNwVJ034275 at drugs.dv.isc.org>	<BLU137-W18376D2DBA85C8F712C06F93980 at phx.gbl>	<8953A1CE-E953-409F-A692-BD12DF4ADE61 at acm.org>	<48724347.6020500 at dcrocker.net>	<18BA25DED8BFD9F794A10E84 at p3.JCK.COM>
	<4872BF88.5040706 at bbiw.net>	<558a39a60807071836s38244439g4054b1175a976454 at mail.gmail.com>
	<49D74735-AB16-4ABE-B626-EF7BC099EAD9 at ca.afilias.info>
In-Reply-To: <49D74735-AB16-4ABE-B626-EF7BC099EAD9 at ca.afilias.info>
Cc: John C Klensin <john-ietf at jck.com>, James Seng <james at seng.sg>,
	Dave Crocker <dcrocker at bbiw.net>, IETF Discussion <ietf at ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf at ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>,
	<mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf at ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>,
	<mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces at ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces at ietf.org

Joe,

On 2008-07-08 14:55, Joe Abley wrote:
...
> I'm not suggesting that growth should be allowed to happen without
> considering the technical chnical consequences. However, I believe in practice
> with the headroom in systems and network that root server operators
> generally install anyway, there's considerable room for growth 

'Considerable' isn't science. How many orders of magnitude do we
have good reason to believe is OK?

> and the
> general argument that growth in the root zone will undermine stability
> sounds more like hysteria than science.

No, it sounds like an absence of science. All we know is that
we are somewhere between 'considerable room for growth' and
'undermining stability.'

Frankly I don't think we have any more idea of the answer to that
than we did on 23 Feb 1998 when the IAB wrote to Ira Magaziner
(http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg04154.html):

> On the other hand, a very large increase in the total number of gTLDs
> (say to thousands) would lead us into technically unknown territory.

I suggest that there is some urgency in conducting a data-based
study of where the limit to stability lies.

    Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


consequences. However, I believe in practice
> with the headroom in systems and network that root server operators
> generally install anyway, there's considerable room for growth 

'Considerable' isn't science. How many orders of magnitude do we
have good reason to believe is OK?

> and the
> general argument that growth in the root zone will undermine stability
> sounds more like hysteria than science.

No, it sounds like an absence of science. All we know is that
we are somewhere between 'considerable room for growth' and
'undermining stability.'

Frankly I don't think we have any more idea of the answer to that
than we did on 23 Feb 1998 when the IAB wrote to Ira Magaziner
(http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg04154.html):

> On the other hand, a very large increase in the total number of gTLDs
> (say to thousands) would lead us into technically unknown territory.

I suggest that there is some urgency in conducting a data-based
study of where the limit to stability lies.

    Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf