Re: DNS: defining "AURSC" domains

Re: DNS: defining "AURSC" domains

From: Kim Davies <kim§>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 09:02:02 +0800
Quoting Lincoln Dale:
| >What's with these analogies that make no sense? The purpose of using them
| >is to relate a characteristic of a known situation to what you're trying
| >to describe.  
| its simply a case of attempting to avoid the issue.

Hmmm... "If the Model T Ford is the only TRUE car in the world, what do you 
drive?  A figment of your imagination?"

| i'm also still attempting to work out who "leigh" is, that adam keeps
| referring to.  going back through my archive of this list (to early
| november 1996), I can't find any other references to a person called
| "leigh".
| the info i collected in finding out the caching nameservers large isps use,
| this could be something useful for you to index in the ISP list you keep.
| waddya think?  it'd be a useful way of finding out the exact (lack-of) uptake
| of certain bogus root-nameservers.

It's funny you should mention that. When it was pronounced a few weeks ago
that AURSC had support from a silent majority, I must admit I was a little
surprised. I wrote a program that collected the authoritative nameservers
for the domains of all the IAPs listed in the ISP List. It then queried
all these nameservers as to their knowledge of "legacy" domains,
and "AURSC" domains.

Obviously this isn't perfect but for a large percentage of providers,
it is very likely the DNS their clients use as a resolver is going to be
one of their authoritative nameservers. So the results were just to get a 
ballpark idea.

Anyway, I never got around to running it, but your post reminded me. So
here are the results..

Providers that returned records for "", but not "": 591
Providers that returned records for "":                         4
Providers that returned records for the domain they are authoritative
 for, but not for "", "" (presumably don't forward): 13
Providers whom I got no response from (timed out, etc.):                 17

FTR, here are the nameservers that knew (1) [Closer To Home Systems: Nambour-QLD, Caboolture-QLD] (1) [NLC: Terrey_Hills/Sydney-NSW] (1) [CyberGate PlaNet: Sydney-NSW] (1) [Zed.Net: Silkwood-QLD, Innisfail-QLD]

Draw whatever conclusions you will, but personally I find it hard to 
believe there is anything but a trivial amount of use of AURSC in relation
to the number of people using the Internet in Australia.

Check out the Australian ISP List ..
Received on Sun Jun 21 1998 - 11:53:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:03 UTC