Kim and all, Kim Davies wrote: > Quoting Lincoln Dale: > | >What's with these analogies that make no sense? The purpose of using them > | >is to relate a characteristic of a known situation to what you're trying > | >to describe. > | > | its simply a case of attempting to avoid the issue. > > Hmmm... "If the Model T Ford is the only TRUE car in the world, what do you > drive? A figment of your imagination?" > > | i'm also still attempting to work out who "leigh" is, that adam keeps > | referring to. going back through my archive of this list (to early > | november 1996), I can't find any other references to a person called > | "leigh". > | > | the info i collected in finding out the caching nameservers large isps use, > | this could be something useful for you to index in the ISP list you keep. > | waddya think? it'd be a useful way of finding out the exact (lack-of) uptake > | of certain bogus root-nameservers. > > It's funny you should mention that. When it was pronounced a few weeks ago > that AURSC had support from a silent majority, I must admit I was a little > surprised. I wrote a program that collected the authoritative nameservers > for the domains of all the IAPs listed in the ISP List. It then queried > all these nameservers as to their knowledge of "legacy" domains, > and "AURSC" domains. > > Obviously this isn't perfect but for a large percentage of providers, > it is very likely the DNS their clients use as a resolver is going to be > one of their authoritative nameservers. So the results were just to get a > ballpark idea. > > Anyway, I never got around to running it, but your post reminded me. So > here are the results.. > > Providers that returned records for "www.ah.net", but not "www.au.rsc": 591 > Providers that returned records for "www.au.rsc": 4 > Providers that returned records for the domain they are authoritative > for, but not for "www.ah.net", "www.au.rsc" (presumably don't forward): 13 > Providers whom I got no response from (timed out, etc.): 17 > > FTR, here are the nameservers that knew www.au.rsc: > central.cth.com.au (1) [Closer To Home Systems: Nambour-QLD, Caboolture-QLD] > nhj.nlc.net.au (1) [NLC: Terrey_Hills/Sydney-NSW] > saturn.thepla.net (1) [CyberGate PlaNet: Sydney-NSW] > gecko.znet.net.au (1) [Zed.Net: Silkwood-QLD, Innisfail-QLD] > > Draw whatever conclusions you will, but personally I find it hard to > believe there is anything but a trivial amount of use of AURSC in relation > to the number of people using the Internet in Australia. Hummmmm? Intresting data indeed. > > > kim > -- > Check out the Australian ISP List .. http://www.cynosure.com.au/isp/ You have a problem nere however. This may be resolvable in Australia, but that is about it. This URL is not a valid DN as far as the Legacy Root structure is concerned outside of Australia. So I find you other conclusions scepitical at best. Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail jwkckid1§ix.netcom.comReceived on Sun Jun 21 1998 - 12:50:27 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:03 UTC