Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!munnari.oz.au!mel.dit.csiro.au!smart From: smart@mel.dit.csiro.au (Robert Smart) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.domains Subject: Re: A plea for care when faking top-level domains Message-ID: <1990Jul22.233936.2568@mel.dit.csiro.au> Date: 22 Jul 90 23:39:36 GMT References: <9007191733.AA01412@venera.isi.edu> Distribution: inet Organization: CSIRO DIT (Melb.) Lines: 29 In article <9007191733.AA01412@venera.isi.edu> pvm@venera.isi.edu writes: >Why are there no root servers in Europe? > ... > >The solution is for BIND to stop badgering root servers for no >particular reason: Realistically there are going to be current versions of BIND floating around for a long time. Surely we have to find a solution which may be technically more difficult but which can be enforced centrally. I suggest that each root name server only service a limited constituency of networks. So the root nameservers in Europe would ignore requests from non-European network numbers. Not only that but when they get a request for "." from a European network number then they will only report back with the European root nameservers. I think that with this scheme you could have as many root nameservers as efficiency requires. How do you find out which networks are where? I think the NIC's whois database has the necessary information -- we don't have to get things perfectly optimal. You then inform the owners of the various networks who their root nameservers are. The root nameservers should also handle in-addr.arpa in the same way. And indeed should only answer queries from registered networks. Bob Smart