on 7/30/2002 1:08 PM Keith Moore wrote: >> If the overall number of lookups has not increased, there will be >> fewer overall lookups for *existing* TLDs as well. > > not from the resolvers to the roots. they'll each contribute one hit > per NS record that has timed out of their cache for the root zone, > regardless of how many queries they handle (>= 1 per zone). 50,000 stale cache hits for .foo today, with .bar gaining equal status tomorrow -- but without an overall increase in user activity -- means that there will not be 50,000 stale cache hits for .foo tomorrow. I'm not saying that it will drop to 25k, but it would be less than 50k. Realistically, there would have to be a significant number of *active* properties at delegations under .bar for there to be parity between them, and this is the least likely scenario given the current climate. Over a ten+ year period this will certainly change, but the technology used to process the root queries will also change. Simply put, the act of adding new zones has no practical effect. Adding additional queries through the use of application-specific data (eg, phone numbers, certificates, and so forth) and adding additional agents that can cause the overall number of queries to go up, those are the real threats. I'm not going to continue this argument. > Sure, but such decisions still have to be made due to various > considerations including but not limited to root server load, and > moving that decision away from ICANN to another controversial > organization isn't likely to solve any problems that I can see. I don't know why you think I am disagreeing with you about this. -- Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/ Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/