Re: Sponsorship of IGF Workshops

Hugh Dierker wrote:

> Go slow for me. I assume that the root server traffic
analysis has 
> been asked for by someone. What is the suggested reason
for refusing 
> to make it public?


The only one I ever remember being published was the one
from CAIDA.  I 
wrote on it:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/02/05/du
d_queries_swamp_us_internet/

After that article I have never again seen an analysis of
root server 
traffic.  I asked for the data and Paul Vxie back then
refused to 
provide it to the public claiming possible privacy
violations.

The reason why root server data and analysis is not made
public is 
because it show how much technical harm has been done or is
being done 
to the technical infrastructure icann as sworn to protect. 
The article 
tells you that back in 2003 98 percent of the queries to the
root 
servers were errors.  This is not altogether true.  Many of
these errors 
are as a result of the rapid expansion of other namespaces -
i.e. like 
the chinese government MII, the arab consortium - etc etc.

I would not be surprised if a majority of the queries were
to chinese 
IDNs run by the chinese government.  I suspect the chinese
wth the 
launch of their national tlds and the conversion of the
china network to 
national IDNs I suspect the chinese traffic would now make
up the bulk 
of the volumn in DNS queries to the ICANN root.

A proper analysis also makes them look like fools.  Since it
shows that 
as the US government has tried to control the internet - the
internet 
has fragemented and the proof is in the traffic error rate.

ICANN is proof that the USG experimet has failed.  This
brings up the 
question - should we develop a root integration experiment
and have that 
replace icann.

You see the problem here.  This data clearly shows that as
icann as 
played fun and games pretending to run the internet, the
internet has 
ended up causing them over 98 % error rate and those errors
represent 
alot of internet roo fragmentation.  And that is a violation
of the IAB 
Policy on the Unique root.

I still remember the silly claims they had at icann many
years ago.  
They were grinding the propaganda mill telling the world
they had a 
monopoly on root services.  The alternative root experiments
proved that 
a farce.

Check in to it - see if you can find any public analysis
available.  
CAIDA should be able to provide you with a copy of the
analysis.

cheers
joe baptista

>  
> Eric
>
> */Joe Baptista <baptistapublicroot.org>/*
wrote:
>
>     Karl Auerbach wrote:
>
>     > Even if ICANN were to vanish in a poof of
money colored smoke IP
>     > packets would still flow unvexed from source
IP address to
>     destination
>     > IP address and domain name query packets would
continue to be
>     > transformed into domain name response packets.
Registrars would
>     still
>     > buy and sell domain names and registrars would
still construct zone
>     > files and run their name servers. Intellectual
property lawyers
>     will
>     > whine, but will compensate by increasing the
bills they send to
>     their
>     > clients. And a lot of superfluous
"staff" and consultants would
>     have
>     > to find new jobs.
>
>     Amen. That day is coming.
>
>     I would go further and say that ICANN has actually
cause problems
>     in the
>     technical function. I'm a bit concerned with their
little
>     experiment in
>     list IDN TLDs as A RRs.
>
>     Also speaking about TLDs as A RRs, what about
localhost. That TLD
>     causes alot of traffic at the root server level.
>      
>     And if ICANN published it's root server traffic
analysis we would
>     see that.
>      
>     Every computer in
>     the world knows the answer to localhost. The only
localhost traffic
>     that is hitting ICANN roots these days is coming
from misconfigured
>     computers. If ICANN provided an answer to localhost
then would
>     that not
>     be better. Would te internet not benefit from a
decrease in localhost
>     traffic to the root servers.
>
>     Part of the function of managing internet resources
is to correct
>     error.
>
>     regards
>     joe baptista
>
>     -- 
>     Joe Baptista www.publicroot.org
>     PublicRoot Consortium
>    
------------------------------------------------------------
----
>     The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent,
Inclusive,
>     Representative & Accountable to the Internet
community large.
>    
------------------------------------------------------------
----
>     Office: +1 (202) 517-1593
>     Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084
>
>     begin:vcard
>     fn:Joe Baptista
>     n:Baptista;Joe
>     org:PublicRoot Consortium
>     adr:;;963 Ford Street;Peterborough;Ontario;K9J 5V5
;Canada
>     email;internet:baptistapublicroot.org
>     title:PublicRoot Representative
>     tel;fax:+1 (509) 479-0084
>     tel;cell:+1 (416) 912-6551
>     x-mozilla-html:FALSE
>     url:http://www.publicroot.org
>     version:2.1
>     end:vcard
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------
------------
> Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places 
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt
=48256/*http://travel.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTFhN2hucjlpBF9TAz
k3NDA3NTg5BHBvcwM1BHNlYwNncm91cHMEc2xrA2VtYWlsLW5jbQ-->on
 
> Yahoo! Travel. 



-- 
Joe Baptista                               
www.publicroot.org
PublicRoot Consortium
------------------------------------------------------------
----
The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive,
Representative & Accountable to the Internet community
large.
------------------------------------------------------------
----
  Office: +1 (202) 517-1593
     Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084

Dr. Dierker and all,

  Dr. Dierker, again please trim your CC list when
responding as
not doing so wastes band width and folks in Vietnam whom may
not
have any sex, can at least not be hendered by wasteful use
of
resources such as band width.

However to your ?:

  Yes I believe at least Joe, Karl, and myself had several
times ask for

these records or where they were available as a link, for
review.  Those

requests went unresponded to, and remain unresponded to. The
archives
of this forum should have a copy of those requests if indeed
the
archives
have not again been redacted and/or had entries removed as
has happened
in the past which against gets back to ICANN accountability
and
transparency
concerns which remain a considerable credibility problem for
ICANN.

  However George, or whomever he really is, is more
concerned
about personality and political correctness issues as is
most of the
BC which is hardly a area of responsibility or function of
ICANN,
nor should it reasonably be of the GA.

Hugh Dierker wrote:

>    Go slow for me. I assume that the root server
traffic analysis has
> been asked for by someone. What is the suggested reason
for refusing
> to make it public?
>
>   Eric
>
> Joe Baptista <baptistapublicroot.org> wrote:
>     Karl Auerbach wrote:
>
> > Even if ICANN were to vanish in a poof of money
colored smoke IP
> > packets would still flow unvexed from source IP
address to
> destination
> > IP address and domain name query packets would
continue to be
> > transformed into domain name response packets.
Registrars would
> still
> > buy and sell domain names and registrars would
still construct zone
> > files and run their name servers. Intellectual
property lawyers will
>
> > whine, but will compensate by increasing the bills
they send to
> their
> > clients. And a lot of superfluous
"staff" and consultants would have
>
> > to find new jobs.
>
> Amen. That day is coming.
>
> I would go further and say that ICANN has actually
cause problems in
> the
> technical function. I'm a bit concerned with their
little experiment
> in
> list IDN TLDs as A RRs.
>
> Also speaking about TLDs as A RRs, what about
localhost. That TLD
> causes alot of traffic at the root server level.
>
>   And if ICANN published it's root server traffic
analysis we would
> see that.
>
>   Every computer in
> the world knows the answer to localhost. The only
localhost traffic
> that is hitting ICANN roots these days is coming from
misconfigured
> computers. If ICANN provided an answer to localhost
then would that
> not
> be better. Would te internet not benefit from a
decrease in localhost
> traffic to the root servers.
>
> Part of the function of managing internet resources is
to correct
> error.
>
> regards
> joe baptista
>
> --
> Joe Baptista www.publicroot.org
> PublicRoot Consortium
>
------------------------------------------------------------
----
> The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent,
Inclusive,
> Representative & Accountable to the Internet
community large.
>
------------------------------------------------------------
----
> Office: +1 (202) 517-1593
> Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084
>
> begin:vcard
> fn:Joe Baptista
> n:Baptista;Joe
> org:PublicRoot Consortium
> adr:;;963 Ford Street;Peterborough;Ontario;K9J 5V5
;Canada
> email;internet:baptistapublicroot.org
> title:PublicRoot Representative
> tel;fax:+1 (509) 479-0084
> tel;cell:+1 (416) 912-6551
> x-mozilla-html:FALSE
> url:http://www.publicroot.org
> version:2.1
> end:vcard





Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k
members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not
with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the
burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied
by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir.
1947]
============================================================
===
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data
security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1ix.netcom.com
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827