[194619] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Question to Google
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Damian Menscher via NANOG)
Mon May 15 13:26:05 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20170515150711.kjv4udwlmi4woctn@nic.fr>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 10:25:37 -0700
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
From: Damian Menscher via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Reply-To: Damian Menscher <damian@google.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 8:07 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 07:55:41AM -0700,
> Damian Menscher <damian@google.com> wrote
> a message of 82 lines which said:
>
> > Can you point to published studies where the root and .com server
> > operators analyzed Todd's questions?
>
> For the root, the most comprehensive one is probably SAC 18
> <www.icann.org/committees/security/sac018.pdf> A good summary is
> <www.icann.org/en/meetings/lisbon/presentation-woolf-ssac-28mar07.pdf>
>
Thanks for sharing. From my quick read, it looks like this was a careful
analysis of the expected impact, not a review of the actual impact. It
reminds me of an instructive joke: "In theory, theory and practice are the
same. In practice, they are not."
Damian
