Re: Last Call: 'Linklocal Multicast Name Resolution (LLMNR)' to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Aug 31, 2005, at 12:50 PM, Bill Manning wrote:

On Aug 31, 2005, at 2:25, Peter Dambier wrote:
Russ Allbery wrote:

Margaret Wasserman <margaret@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Other than a few minor issues that are being dealt with in a -43 update, I don't think that anyone has raised a blocking technical issue with the LLMNR specification during this IETF LC. If you (or anyone else) has intended to raise a blocking technical issue, either with LLMNR itself or with its ability to coexist with mDNS, please make that clearer to
me.


Sorry I overlooked this:

I dont count 25% of the root server traffic a minor issue.
With 90% of root server traffic used to be for localhost and with
25% of root server traffic already for local, we are looking into
a major DoS attack. This might overload ISPs DNS servers it might
even bring the root servers down if they let it free!



i'm going to have to raise the point that Peters "root-server" system is his private "walled-garden" and not representative of the Internet's
    authoritative root servers.   Just for clarification.

--bill


i want to correct bills concern that , " peters public root server system" is
an alternative for  the existing ones  and there are several others .


-marc

http://www.public-root.com/


--
"Wer also allgemeine Aufklärung verbreitet, verschafft zugleich eben dadurch allgemeine wechselseitige Sicherheit, und allgemeine Aufklärung und Sicherheit machen Fürsten und Staaten entbehrlich. Oder wozu braucht man sie sodann?"

Les Enfants Terribles
www.let.de


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]