Dr Eberhard W Lisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg Skinner writes:

>> In the absence of hard data, people will argue their opinion based on
>> their experience.  

> So, tell us about your experience.

Having worked on and studied some applications that require millions
of bidirectional name-to-address resolutions on a daily basis, I have
formed the same opinions that Keith Moore and some of the others have
who feel hundreds of thousands of TLDs pose a serious threat to the
performance of DNS.

>> No one knows for sure what will happen when the safe TLD limit is
>> exceeded.

> What safe limit would that be?

100,000 seems to be a popular figure.

>> Anyway, even if TLDs are added a thousand at a time, I've not seen
>> any evidence that they will suffice to qualify all the trademarks or
>> service marks that are necessary to avoid DN lawsuits.

> That is something else entirely.

But it relates to one of the other points that I've been trying to
make.  No one seems to have an idea of how many TLDs are necessary to
appropriately qualify a name.

>> Once upon a time, there were some people who thought that if you
>> added more bandwidth to the Arpanet, the congestion problems that
>> were occuring at the time would go away.  However, it took some
>> studies by a control theorist to show that changes needed to be made
>> to the TCP protocol to relieve congestion.

> So, more horsepower!

The changes turned out to be minimal -- a few extra lines of TCP code.
The proposed extra bandwidth, even if it would have solved the
problem, would have cost considerably more.
 
>> You can't just throw more hardware or software at a problem and
>> expect it to go away (unless you *know* that this will solve your
>> problem).  System-wide analysis is required.

> How do ther German DNSlers percieve this? They run gazillions of
> second levels with no melt down. Probably with more horsepower.

More horsepower means more $$$.  It seems you are saying that it is
appropriate to solve a technical problem by spending more money.

--gregbo

Reply via email to