[132149] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The i-root china reroute finally makes fox news. And congress.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Wed Nov 17 01:43:45 2010
In-Reply-To: <C29C7F3C-D2BD-42BA-B2CB-A49B796F66FA@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:13:39 +0530
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists@gmail.com>
To: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Man in the middle rewriting of DNS query responses is the only thing I
can think of.
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com> wrote:
> I have read the article and the list, and I'm puzzled. It's pretty clear =
that the root gets its records from a common source, and that the copies of=
them being delivered by a given root server were different. As a result, t=
raffic intended to go place A went to place B if the TLD lookup happened to=
go to the particular root server in question. How did an instance of the r=
oot server find itself serving changed records? While there is no obvious i=
ndication of who made the change or for what reason, it's unlikely it was a=
ccidental.
--=20
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)
