Sun no Longer the "dot" in .com 173
An anonymous reader writes: "Sun's claim to fame, namely being the "dot" in .com in all their TV spots, has been snatched by IBM. Their E10000 which was serving as the A.Root server has been replaced by an IBM RS/6000 S80. " OK, it's not the most significant news, but it was just funny to see that title. ;)
There's gotta be a clever comment... (Score:5)
I just can't think of it.
Damn.
oops, "my bad": (Score:2)
(from the NANOG mailing list:)
Date: 14 Apr 2000 20:04:52 -0700
From: Sean Donelan
To: tomn@netsol.com
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: RE: NetSol screwing the pooch?
[snip]
I'm a bit concerned when I read about a plan to install identical
servers, with identical configurations, with identical software,
connected to identical routers also with identical software and
configurations, operated by a single human point of contact.
[snip]
- A.P.
--
"One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad
I'll believe it when I see it (Score:1)
Sun has been swapping processor boards on running systems for quite some time now. Designing a computer that can do this is _not_ an easy thing to do. The E10K is a second generation machine (the Cray CS6400 was the first generation). Dynamic Reconfiguration ("DR") requires all device drivers to be tested and stable during this operation. Memory has to be "drained" from the banks on the board being removed and processes have to be migrated off of the processors on the board being removed. The hardware on the system board has to support DR, the backplane has to support DR, the control board has to support DR, the operating system has to support DR, and the Service Processor has to control DR.
Again, _not_ easy. I do expect that IBM, given its extensive experience making mainframes, could definately provide this capability to a UNIX system if they put their minds to it. Heck, they put LPARS on the AS400.
BTW, the E10K has three times the system memory bandwidth of the S80. That is why IBM will never publish a Stream benchmark for the S80.
Not entirely correct. (Score:1)
1). NSI Registrar actually manages this, the "independent" part of NSI.
2). Nobody cares that NSI chose IBM over SUN as it's only one machine. You guys fuss like this machine is actually important when it's actually about as significant as my home PC. If it goes down things might become a little slower for uncached queries, but the vast majority of users won't notice any change - it's called DynamicNS for a reason fokes, stop fussing over one particular box.
3). NSI are being twerps choosing to standardise on certain stuff when in reality I'd trust (no Verisign pun intended
4). NSI do ___NOT___ maintain the domains for other countries. They may own the box that is A.root-servers.net but that only takes you from the "." to "com." or "uk." - the actual country dns's coupe with registrations - so NSI are trying to claim responsibility for something they know crap all about and that they don't own or run.
5). They articles are so badly written that they might as well have not been written at all.
In short:
"NSI today purchased a new box to replace A.root-servers.net, which used to be a SUN E10000 box. The "A" root server is responsible for resolving the top level '.' domain into subdomains such as
Jonathan.
--
oh-go-on-spam-me-spam@easypenguin.com
Re:hits increase (Score:1)
Automatic lookups of domains in order to find out if they're free? Feeded by word databases which itself were built by semi-automatic "buzzword generators"?
Really, when the imac came out I would guess that 1 million domain-traders tried to catch everything from www.i-apple.com to www.i-zoo.com.
Re:So what happens if THAT machine goes down? (Score:2)
But hadn't the world pretty much gone to Unix by the time the Internet began?
D
----
Me too (Score:1)
Vermifax
Re:Only $80k? (Score:2)
If you have a Starfire fo $80k, let me in on where to pick one up!
Re:It has to be 6 processors (Score:1)
Re:One server? (Score:1)
Damn slash!! (Score:4)
One Server to rule them
One Server to find them
One Server to bring them
And in the DNS BIND them
Last bit of shameless IBM propaganda, really... (Score:1)
I will now cease to rant, unless otherwise provoked 8^)
Re:Heh (Score:2)
S80 is faster and cheaper. (Score:1)
That's all really.
Change the ads. (Score:5)
Looks like after that they've decided to change to the "doh" in
[drum hit]
Hotnutz.com [hotnutz.com] - Funny
what are they doing with the old server? (Score:3)
Random Person-"you mind if i get a coke?"
Me-"That's not any ordinary fridge. that's a.root!"
Random Person-"huh?"
that would be fun. but seriously, what do they do with the ex-servers? i mean, no matter if it is an E450 or the E10000 the article claimed, that's still some serious power. it's funny when technology you could never afford in a million years gets deemed obsolete. maybe i'll get a big alpha-200 server or something for cheap and pretend it's a.root. or something. isn't it great to be geek?
Re:The hardware isn't what caught my eye in the st (Score:2)
The root servers run bind, and server out names. Period.
The registry facilities (internic, formerly) are on a totally different system.
Re:Incorrect posting, please change (Score:2)
And a quad processor e450 running solaris will eat you for breakfast.
Some compaq servers? If it's a quad alpha.. yeah...
but you can't beat solaris.
Re:The IBM Straw Man Army (Score:2)
but you know.. some sun salesmen REALLY piss me off. VERY pushy. The worst thing you can do with me is get pushy.
BRAVO! (Score:2)
Oh.. thanks
Re:Still a single point of failure (Score:2)
Re:Interesting trend.. (Score:1)
Everything I have seen and heard says the hardware is more reliable than anything Sun makes. Unfortunately, there are 6 times as many patches you have to apply to make the software run at all (all of them triggering an auto-reboot after install. Damn, Toto, I think we are in Windows again...)
Whoo-hoo (Score:1)
Hey... they pay my salary, what can I say 8^)
Heh (Score:3)
Insert "Big Blue Dot" jokes here.
(Odd, too -- Sun's E10K, or "Starfire" box, kicks ass. Copious amounts of ass. I'm surprised they switched.)
Re:maybe now they'll stop running those lame ads (Score:1)
If they all stopped, or actually made sense (smelling a Thinkpad?!), I'd feel a lot better.
Re:In other Sun news (Score:1)
Yup, I got suckered by the bug here too [slashdot.org] (corrected non-previewed post here [slashdot.org]). Seems this guy [slashdot.org] did too (and had to correct [slashdot.org] it as well). Just venting my (offtopic) frustration, that's all... ;-) (fingers crossed without preview...)
Re:Heh (Score:1)
Thought it was Al Gore who invented the net... (Score:2)
Database not updating? (Score:1)
Re: One server? (Score:2)
Assuming you can figure out where they all are form the IP addresses in the root.cache file, and traceroute, or other similar tools, and maybe a bit of social engenering, it shouldn't be any harder then any other 12 randomly selected machines. (i.e. you may get unlucky and some are in phone COs and you need to get into a somewhat secure area, or blow through a lot of concrete in the internal walls behing the office bilding facade).
That wouldn't take out "the Internet", just much of name service. It would suck a lot. As caches started timing out things would start to suck a lot more.
However there are unoffical secondaries (not listed), and I assume other backup sets of the data. "All" that would be required would be to set up another root server (or 12), and route the old root serve's machine's IP address to the new ones. Wait less then five minutes for routing to converge, and all is right with name service again. Regretabably the loss of life involved in "12 explosions" would be far harder to "correct".
Beats me how long it would take to fix. If there is a real drill for it, maybe under an hour. If there is no drill for it, it could be much longer since the "12 explosions" probbably will cause lots of confusion.
Still the dot in dot com (Score:4)
Re:Heh (Score:1)
Although I'm sure a Blaupunkt server would look better in a VW New Beetle.
Re:When you've been an SA way too long... (Score:2)
I felt someone had to stand up for AIX, cause well, it got me a job at one point, and you're the only one who will! `8r) but I still say I was dead on about the 'smit' crack. heh
As far as the a brand new IBM box beating a Solaris box.... that's not bad for a box that first [sun.com] started shipping in March 1997. It just got leapfrogged 3 years later for some odd reason... `8r)
--
Gonzo Granzeau
With Sun out of the way... (Score:1)
Re:Interesting trend.. (Score:1)
--hunter
Re:Article filled with inaccuracies (Score:1)
The A root name server has doubled transaction growth in the past quarter to over 5000 queries per second with peaks up to 8000 queries per second.
Which comes out to ~430 million queries/day - as the article states...
Though several other sources seem to agree - it was a E10K...
Still a single point of failure (Score:3)
Which is one reason IBM sells clustering solutions for just about everything they make.
This makes me curious -- what would happen if the root A server got totalled? What gets failed over onto? I know I should RTFM, and I will, but my Stevens books are at home.
Interesting trend.. (Score:2)
Guess Sun better check it's six, huh?
It has to be 6 processors (Score:4)
The biggest advantage to an S80 is the price/performance ratio. The big disadvantage is that it has to be shut down when a CPU or a memory card fails. E10K's can hot swap CPUs and memory, but E450's can't...
Just clarifying.
Re:this has *nothing* to do with linux (Score:2)
Well, of course ! The whole reason it performs better is because of Linux. Imagine millions of Linux developers coding and sweating, saying "IBM is cool". Their effort then will naturally turn into CPU power, making all IBM CPUs magically run faster. The box itself doesn't have to run Linux (of course, it would be *at least* 10 times faster if it did).
It certainly is because of Linux. Anyone suggesting any other alternatives are deranged.
Re:Heh (Score:1)
Re:Damn slash!! (Score:1)
--
Re:The hardware isn't what caught my eye in the st (Score:2)
--
Re:It has to be 6 processors (Score:1)
Re:maybe now they'll stop running those lame ads (Score:1)
dot in .com (Score:4)
Re:Heh (Score:2)
So they have two choices:
1) The Sun, total expenditure 100% of the cost of one Sun.
2) The IBM, total expenditure 150% of the cost of one Sun.
All of my co-workers on projects using IBM are wishing like hell they'd picked Sun, and meanwhile my Sun servers are happy as clams, chugging along, unaffected by the crashes over on the Blue side of the data center.
Re:Thought it was Al Gore who invented the net... (Score:2)
DNS DoS - the need for scalability (Score:1)
Just from a theretical point of view, how difficult do you think it would be to take those servers down from terrorist activity. I mean could the internet be taken down if 12 explosions at the right time/place where detonated?
Stripes starts his reply:
Assuming you can figure out where they all are form the IP addresses in the root.cache file, and traceroute, or other similar tools, and maybe a bit of social engenering, it shouldn't be any harder then any other 12 randomly selected machines.
Define "explosions"
Stripes, The poster to which you responded did not specify what type of explosions were available to them. If they're nuclear explosions, they'd probably need only 8-10 strategically placed explosions to wipe out all of the current neameservers (with or without social engineering). If they're lucky, they might take out the "shadow root servers" as well. Given the location of some of the root servers, they'd probably cripple alot more than just DNS. They'd effectively take out a good deal of infrastructure as well as the Internet engineers necessary to repair it, not to mention start a worldwide panic.
The Internet would still recover though, much as you described in your post. Anyone can setup a redundant server cluster within a matter of minutes given a set of pre-staged root and first level zone data.
The more interesting problems are due to corrupted data rather than doing denial of service attacks on nameservers. Some bad data in Network Solution's database can make various interesting parts of the Internet suck really bad. When one root server has data corruption, the whole net feels it. Imagine if some NSOL staffer garbled the nameserver data for "Yahoo.COM." or "IN-ADDR.ARPA." to point to 255.255.255.255 instead of the real servers?
For anyone else interested in DNS DoS...
An easier method
One of the easiest way to kill DNS is to try a coordinated DoS attack against all of the nameservers. Each of the world hundreds of thousands of resolvers is configured to use any of 13 root nameservers. Just like a 15-year-old kid did with HTTP requests, one could probably start a distributed DoS attack against DNS. The "heftiest" root nameserver is rumored somewhere in this discussion to be able to handle 6000-8000 hits a second. With 13 published nameservers, one needs only about 100000 hits per second to saturate the current capacity of all of the servers. Let's say that I was a bright hacker (which I'm not) that I could find my way into 1000 machines around the world that each had a T1 connection or better. Can we agree that this is a difficult but not unreasonably impossible thing to do? If one were not smart enough to do it themselves, one could perhaps go to a hacker convention or local user group and bribe a script kiddie seeking infamy and fortune to go forth an find 1000 machines to hack. Another way is to unleash a time-dated virus onto the net that will do your bidding at a specific time. Each machine would gather a list of 100 addresses, perhaps starting with the history file of a user's browser to get a list of second-level domains. It could also look for addresses using a popular portal directory or search engine and interpret results to get domain names. With 100 domain names, it would query 100 names per second (less than one megabit) from each of the few registered root nmeservers. While the traffic isn't overwhelming, it will overload the root servers fo rthe number of transactions per second, and nothing short of hunting and killing half of the query servers would reduce the effectiveness of the attack. To make the attack harder to stop, one could double or quadruple the number of query servers or use methods of masquerading your attack (I won't go into detail here) to keep network administrators from being able to shut down query servers. Another way to scale the attack is to use they heavier TCP protocol for most of the queries instead of the lightweight UDP.
fin.
The technology needed to exponentially increase the ability of the root servers to perform is not out of reach. With the proper motivation (a DoS like I described), one million dollars of capital (compare $1m to the current valuation of NSOL), and perhaps 30 man-weeks of time, one can make a farm of servers able to handle two orders of magnitude more requests than the current set of servers.
The IBM server announcement by Network Solutions disappoints me. It's sad.
Any of the following are good candidates that I know about for scalably solving root DNS infrastructure problems...
- UltraDNS [ultradns.com] - DNS service provider with an interesting spin on distributed scalability
- Nominum [nominum.com] - the knowledge and knowhow to make fast scalable DNS servers and software
- Akamai [akamai.com]/Sandpiper [sandpiper.net] - a distributed operations infrastructure onto which one can install root clusters.
Hint: If one can make an application layer proxy host that takes inbound DNS requests and routes them based on a hash table of domain names to a set of back end nameservers (with only a fraction of domains loaded on each), one could have the start of a scalable solution. One can make a fast cheap BSD box to do this up to 5000 ops per second or better. I wonder if the skunk works at Novell can do ths faster. One can use some router technology (OSPF, trunking, or L4 switching) to spray UDP requests to a number of these appliction load balancer / DNS proxy servers.One can also implement interesting filters on such a proxy server to reduce the effect of stupider resolvers or lame DoS attacks.
--
Eric Ziegast
PS: Slashdot probably isn't the best forum for this, but if you know a better forum, feel free to point them toward this post.
PPC (Score:1)
Just wait, tomorrow, we'll hear about them replacing the RS/6000 with a warehouse full of water-cooled quad Xeons running Windows 2000.
We wont hear, of course, that MS fronted the money for the HW.
I wish I had a nickel for every time someone said "Information wants to be free".
Re:One server? (Score:2)
Here's why eBay are moving to HP: (Score:2)
just a note, in case anyone is wondering what I am talking about when www.ebay.com is shown to be running IIS by netcraft. They run IIS/NT for the pretty Frontpage stuff, but have a look at the guts of the site: search.ebay.com . That's running Zeus 3.3.
I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade (Score:2)
Millions more names have been registered by competing companies and registrars outside the United States. Network Solutions will disclose exactly how many next week when it reports quarterly earnings.
For sale! (Score:3)
Small clarification about what this server serves (Score:5)
Actually, this is not true. This server only translates the field directly before the TLD extension. That is, only yahoo.com and marthastewart.com are served. The www part is supplied by yahoo and martha's respective root servers.
I realize that the author of the article probably knows this, but did not include it in his article so my mother would understand, but I feel
Sludgie
and what's up with my tags being removed in the editing field when I preview? That's annoying.
Re:maybe now they'll stop running those lame ads (Score:2)
Hey there..
Isn't it arguable that SRI & ISI put the . in
RFC830 put the . in
Then, a little later, RFC 881 defined the
domain name heirarchy.
And RFC920, an ISI publication "Domain Requirements" actually lays out the top level domain structure, seperating 'education' 'commercial' and 'government', i.e, the first definition of
So I'd say that RFC830 put the . later used in the RFC920 COM.
Oh well..
Re:Thought it was Al Gore who invented the net... (Score:2)
The sad part is he was almost right, just you have to know your history. He sponsored the bill that got the Internet started, back when it was just arpanet and a couple researchers.
It's great to have a good laugh at politians talking out their ass, but the scary part is he was there at the begining, even if only as a politian. course, he still can't debug a tcp/ip stack. `8r)
--
Gonzo Granzeau
Re:Related: Slashdot no longer "slash" in "slashdo (Score:2)
Slashdot has never been the slash between the domain and directory, slashdot is the second slash in http:// and as of March 18 of this year, it's the first slash in ftp://. A currently pending deal will make it both of the slashes in gopher://.
Watch for this on eBay ... (Score:5)
Only if you count one server! (Score:4)
If you look at the Fortune 100 corporate web sites, 52% of them are running Solaris with various web servers. Now this is certainly flamebait to most /.ers, the runner up was Windows NT (2000) with 29%. Interesting fact: Linux only runs one of the Fortune 100 web sites.
Re:This is all because of Linux (Score:2)
Re:This is all because of Linux (Score:2)
IBM's drop in revenue originates in their consulting arm (IBM Global Services). It's nothing to do with their OS division - altho', given their current enthusiasm for Linux, that's probably about to change (think about it... the only way to make money on Linux is on yep, services).
Re:Only if you count one server! (Score:2)
somebody screwed up .. (Score:3)
from an inside Sun source at NSI:
1) There are no E10000 that were replaced .. there are no E10K servers at NSI. the old a.root-servers.net ran on an E450 (4proc) 4GB of Ram, and of those four processors their single-threaded bind process consumes 1.
2) a.root-servers.net is the top authoritative server for the .com, .net and .org zones and i think they also load the .mil, .edu, .gov, and .arpa on a.root .. that's it. The internal press release claims that they hold zones for all the ccTLDs (country-code specific Top Level Domains). This is incorrect, but they do point to the correct authoritative servers for each of the country codes.
suprising to find that much of NSI isn't aware of what exactly they do ..
Re:Thought it was Al Gore who invented the net... (Score:2)
Re:Small clarification about what this server serv (Score:2)
Not even that is served from the root servers. All the root servers serve is IP addresses of the nameservers for the domain of the host being looked up, its up to the domains nameservers to deal out any actual IP's, including for their own domain.
You look up marthastewart.com, your nameserver asks one of the root nameservers where the nameservers for marthastewart.com is, it then asks them for the IP to marthastewart.com.
-- iCEBaLM
Not ".com", but "com." (Score:3)
The rootservers are, as everyone who has ever edited a nameserver zone file knows, the dot in "com.", not in ".com" (which actually is ".com." and invalid without a proper 2nd leven domain).
Re:Still a single point of failure (Score:5)
In other words, DNS has failover built in.
However, if the server stayed down for an extended period of time, it would probably cause updates not to happen. I suspect they could get a new server in place for that purpose within a reasonably short period of time, though.
Bloat in .com et al (Score:2)
Could this possibly have anything to do with the "hot property" domain mindset that means every acme.com also registers acme-widgets.com, acme-foo.com, and acme-bar.com, instead of using the DNS hierarchically as it was designed for by registering widgets.acme.com and so on within their own domain?
Re: One server? (Score:4)
*One* Server holds the master file?
One server hold the master file, yes. That master file is mirrored among many other servers which are not only located in different parts of the country but also in different parts of the world.
No load balancing/[obligatory beowulf]/Round Robin? I would like to think there is some redundancy in there...
{sigh} Spoken like a true PC server user.
I've got four S70s which are almost identical to the S80 but max at 12 processors instead of the S80's 24.
When you think server, you see a tower or maybe even a rack-mount PC. The S80 is no such beast. It is literally the size of an industrial refridgerator. And that's just for the processors. Right next to it is another cabinet of a similar size which has the IO drawers, drives and else.
The only parts of the S80 that are not redundant are the processors and memory. Since both are non-moving, non-mechanical parts, they have an ultra long MTBF. If either fries, the machine takes itself down, 'deconfigures' the failed item and then brings itself back online. Try to get any PC server out there to do that.
(Our S70 lost one of 12 processors three weeks ago at threeish in the morning. It was down and up so quickly no one even noticed it. A few days later, I was reviewing some logs and noticed that I was short a processor.)
Yes, no system is failure-proof. However, the mindset that the S80 suffers from the same problems as a PC server is as silly as thinking a Piper Cub is in the same league as Air Force One (the president's plane).
Internally, the S80 is redundant and can support an amazing load, externally, the DNS system will out-live us all.
InitZero
Re:Thought it was Al Gore who invented the net... (Score:2)
The statement is also bogus in that even if he had authored the bill and pushed it through all by himself, he could not have claimed credit for anything other than an accidental success, since the original project was merely an inter-university research network, a make-work project for a soon-to-be defunct government organization (DARPA). He implies that he was some sort of visionary, when he had no idea what arpanet would evolve into. The Internet as it exists today became that way because of the ideas and work of people entirely unconnected with the government.
What he should have said was: I voted yes to a project that I was not actively involved with, and that changed the world completely after it was handed off to commercial interests and revamped."
-JD
YES (Score:2)
the . in
When you've been an SA way too long... (Score:5)
(April 20, 2000) Up to recently, Network Solutions Inc. (NSI) used a Sun E10000, one of the powerhouses of the computer world. But recently, they've moved to a brand new IBM RS/6000 S80. What brought on this startling change? The Dali Lama caught up with someone from NSI recently and here's what went on.
"Well, it all started with Comdex last year." says J.R. Bob Dobbs, VP of Sales at NSI. "Sally over in Marketing talked to this really cool guy at the IBM exihibit. Anyway, he said he could get this really great deal on this new equipment they had coming out. and she said to me 'Wow, think of the free publicity...' and we just knew we had to move. Besides, the old E10000 allows you to do maintance while part of it isn't working, and I'd rather it just stop working while someone is fixing it! I mean, when you blow a tire on your car, do you want it to actually keep driving instead of forcing you to pull over! Come on, that's dumb!"
But what of the costs of migrating to an entirely new Unix platform? and the support costs? Dobbs commented "Well, the migration wasn't very easy, but after calling IBM technical support every day for the past month, hiring IBM global services to come out and fix it repeatedly, and firing our entire Solaris loving admin staff, we're through the migration already! I don't care if the new Sun processors and new 128 processor machine is coming out in six months, I want to spam the domain owners now! Besides, IBM assured us that he would install this great tool called 'smit' on the machine. Hell, I'm the Systems Engineer now! I don't even know what it's doing, I just point and click and it does stuff! Think about the huge amounts of savings with Administrative staff! Besides, IBM assures me I won't need anything but smit! I'm even IBM certified!"
And what of the older processes still in place, like mail forms for registration names, and sending 'CRYPT-PW' via mail? Bob quickly snarled back with "Oh, you want security? wah, go cry in your milk, you linux pussy. I got the root server, fuck off."
Obviously, great things are instore for NSI in the future.
[note: Sorry if I'm a little biased, but how probable is this scenerio? Anyone else ever dealt NSI or IBM on a 'professional' level? And yes, it's all a joke. J.R. Bob Dobbs is entirely too cool to talk to the Dali Lama.]
--
Gonzo Granzeau
Re:Heh (Score:2)
Re:One server? (Score:2)
(and DNS has so many hot backups worldwide, redundancy is, well, taken care of
blue dot bulbs (Score:2)
Then again, I still have a stash of the pre-cube
single little blue bulbs, a handful of flashcubes (not magicubes; they needed a battery),
and even some #5 bulbs (or are mine 25s? I forget)--the ones nearly the size of a golfball.
And I have the cameras to go with them. What I *don't* have is the 120 and 620 film (but you can still get at least the 120) that the cameras take . . . ooh, and one that takes 127 . . .
Re:The hardware isn't what caught my eye in the st (Score:3)
slashslashdot.* is still available. Somebody could turn that into a good "News for Serial Killers. Stuff That Splatters" web site.
antislashdot.* is available too. The site for people who think
Or you could just take suckdot.org. I'm surprised nobody took this one after the suck.com parody.
But dot[dot[dot[...]]].* are all taken up to 5 dots. So's quux.net. You can't have that one.
If anyone uses one of these and IPOs and makes a fortune, can you buy me a sports car? Thanks!
/peter
Interesting Specs... (Score:2)
David E. Weekly [weekly.org]
.borg (Score:2)
:()
[I hope this doesn't appear twice; it looked like the message that flashed as I was killing the box said somehtin like slashdot requrires 70 seconds between comments . .
Re:One server? (Score:2)
--
Re:Only if you count one server! (Score:2)
One server? (Score:2)
No load balancing/[obligatory beowulf]/Round Robin?
I would like to think there is some redundancy in there...
Re:One server? (Score:2)
I'm at work on an old SPARCstation IPX running Netscape 3... Anyway, I previewed, but when I submitted I didn't notice that NS had stripped out the HTML tags from the text box. Anyway, here it is again, properly formatted: An old legend...
One Server to hold the file
One Server to find them
One Server to serve them all
And in the darkness BIND them...
--
fidonet, as well (Score:2)
It was going to happen; the question is merely when and from what roots.
Hmm, and I'd bet spam would be significantly less of an issue had it grown from fidonet, but that's a completely different issue . . .
Re:Article filled with inaccuracies (Score:2)
Our Root server (not NSI, one of the others) is a dual-processor Sun 450 with 4 Gigs of RAM.
Bind 9 does load balancing between two or more processors, bind 8... well... doesn't. Running top on the root server while it's running, and you see CPU3 with high utilization, and cpu 1 with like 1% (only from top and the shell)
I don't really see the point of going multiple processors until they use Bind 9.
FWIW, the 'A' server really isn't the master of the root domain anymore, since ICANN has control over what goes in, and what stays out of the root zone.
As for the single point of failure, if A blows up, destroyed by fire, destroyed by quake, etc., the others just simply will have to pick up the load of the missing 'A'.
If the mechanism of downloading the zones fails, we have a while (a few weeks) to make up our minds about what to do before bad things happen -- like internet not working anymore.
And I know at least one Root Server Operator (well, me...) who checks out slashdot daily. I bet more do.
Not the dot. (Score:3)
The . is actually the trailing dot, ie '.com.'. The top-level zone in DNS, that all other records are part of is simply '.'. It's assumed, and not normally written with a domain name (anyone working with bind sees this constantly)
The dot in
Re:Only $80k? (Score:2)
Re:Heh (Score:2)
-JD
Re:Thought it was Al Gore who invented the net... (Score:3)
It is much more expressive.
It doesn't require $500 haircuts.
It doesn't come with Tipper Gore chained to it.
It doesn't say nearly as much dumb stuff.
Give it a 'net connection and it can attend global events virtually! Saves on $70,000 joy rides in Air Force Two.
There is very little chance the RS/6000 could be swayed by Microsoft into calling the DOJ off. Now if IBM were to offer a couple new CPU's, we'd be in trouble.
It doesn't waffle. Everything is yes or no, 1 or 0. No more bullshit answers.
Sun E10000 is older than 1997 (Score:2)
Article filled with inaccuracies (Score:3)
Re:Heh (Score:3)
The price point of the S80 also makes it an amazing bargain compared to the E10K... and the S80 sold 1000 units in 4 months - the E10K took over a year to reach the same sales... and the S80 was named '99 product of the year by several reports. Not too surprising. I am interested to see how well the USparc III does... it'll be a while, though...
#inlcude
I wonder.. (Score:2)
I wonder if there were any technical reasons for the switch of platfrom... ie Solaris to AIX... or if it a corpoarte agreement... specially since netSOl was bought by versign.
Hey, I'm the dot in .com (Score:2)
Busiest Server (Score:3)
Sounds like a whole lotta 'dot' to me.
----------------------------------------------
Where did you get this info? (Score:2)
How did you get this?
BTW, the proc[0-3] represents the processor card, each of which holds 6 processors and is hooked to the backplane (thus the 00-)
what about the superhighway? (Score:2)
But there are just more more credible quotes to make fun of rather than the same one OVER AND OVER AND OVER again. you know, ones where they said what they meant and it still came out wrong...
--
Gonzo Granzeau
Not only has it been replaced... (Score:5)
Scary, huh?
- A.P.
--
"One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad
Re:Watch for this on eBay ... (Score:2)
Pope
Re:One server? (Score:2)