On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, Keith Moore wrote: > > > Well, it also matters that the set be constrained to some degree. > > > A large flat root would not be very managable, and caches wouldn't > > > be very effective with large numbers of TLDs. > > > > That's old fiction. If it works for .com it will work for ".". > > well, it's not clear that it works well for .com. try measuring > delay and reliability of queries for a large number of samples > sometime, and also cache effectiveness. > > let's put it another way. under the current organization if .com breaks > the other TLDs will still work. if we break the root, everything fails. I just can't buy the argument. The root won't break. .com works fine - so would the root. The only issue would be vulnerability - if the roots were under attack and the "." file was as large as the .com zone - then i would imgine there would be a significant problem. These same vulnerability issues exist for the .com zone everyday. It's a very vulnerable namespace to attack. Thats about the only significant problem i see to a "." file being as large as .com. regards joe baptista