Position paper for the TERENA TEC to decide to start actions in order to host a root server in the core of GEANT

Transcription

1 Position paper for the TERENA TEC to decide to start actions in order to host a root server in the core of GEANT GA(02)023 By C Allochio (GARR), S Jaume-Rajaonia (RENATER) 1. Introduction One of the fundamental basic services existing on the Internet is the Domain Name System (DNS), and its own basic stone are the Root Name Servers, i.e. those DNS servers where the start point of the whole structure of Internet Domain Names is known. These servers (currently 13 - see enclosed list) should be located in places where the connectivity to the Internet is multiple and various, but the current list is still very related to the situation of the Internet in the '80, resulting nowadays in some Root Servers which happen to be inside terminal leaves of the connectivity. The current Root Servers seems not to be located in strategic positions with regard to the European and worldwide R&D current networks (GEANT in Europe, Abilene-Internet2 in USA, etc...) and they now result not in the best possible locations, if we compare their sites with current network routing information. This can pose (in some peculiar situations) serious timing problems: a test we made on the whole list of Name Servers from most of the European R&D networks, when many connections to North America were suddenly cut off after September 11 th 2001, resulted in some of them giving "no response due to time out" (exceeded TTL to be exact) and some others are anyhow about 15 hops away, which is definitely inefficient. The global delay which end users were experiencing when they issue a query in that situation was in the order of 5 to 10 seconds, which might time out some services, like an SSH session initialisation. This proved somehow that the current distribution of DNS Root Servers seems not to be able to recover under disrupted routing and connectivity situation, probably also due to its totally unbalanced distribution between USA, Europe and Asia. Since a long time IANA, and now ICANN, have been trying to adjust the system, but due to the fact that there are maybe 2 possible Root Servers to de replaced and more than 25 pending applications, the decision was on total hold. There is a technical proposal to re-create the whole Root Name Servers, with a "central core" of less than 3 hosts, and a number of "Root Secondaries" (in the order of 100), which will make the situation much easier and much more efficient and safe. However, due to the situation inside ICANN, also this possible solution is on hold.

2 List of root servers a.root-servers.net. USA, on pnap.net. b.root-servers.net. USA, on isi.edu. c.root-servers.net. USA, on psi.net. d.root-servers.net. USA, on umd.edu. e.root-servers.net. USA, on gblx.net. f.root0servers.net. USA, on isc.org. g.root-servers.net. USA, on qwest.net. h.root-servers.net. USA, on army.mil. i.root-servers.net. Sweden, on sth.netnod.se. j.root-servers.net. USA, on pnap.net k.root-servers.net. UK, on thn.linx.net l.root-servers.net. USA, on verio.net m.root-servers.net. Japan, on wide.ad.jp While the root servers operations is done in a very professional and responsible way; especially on the ones directly operated by the R&E community, the current network connectivity which links them to the global Internet does not offer such reliability, yet. The normal network connectivity usually provides traffic routes to reach the existing root servers that are not usually optimised: reaching a geographically near server can take a very long routing in term of networks hops. No problems are evident; but in very peculiar situations; like the one which happened after September 11 th 2001 where a large number of links to North America were cut off simultaneously, this can make the path to the existing root servers too long (resulting in time outs) or even create network loops, which result in the same disruptive effect. 2. Who are we? The GEANT network is running since 1st December 2001, taking over from the previous pan- European research network TEN-155. Reaching over 3,000 research and education institutions in over 30 countries through 28 national and regional research and education networks, GÉANT represents a very large number of professional users for whom both high quality of service (for the provision of new applications and the creation of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)) and a reliable internet connectivity is requested. GEANT provides the highest capacity and offers the greatest geographic coverage of any network of its kind in the world. GÉANT is set up by a Consortium of 27 European national research and education networks (NRENs), with DANTE as its co-ordinating partner, which is a well organised and stable model of cooperation between National Research Networks. Co-funded by the European Commission as part of its Framework V Programme, its goal was the improvement of the previous generation of pan-european research network, TEN-155, by creating a backbone at Gigabit speeds. The GEANT network is a multi-gigabit network covering Europe, Eastern and some Mediterranean countries, with a 10 Gigabits core. See map hereafter.

3 GEANT is also improving the connectivity with Research Networks in other world regions: North and South America, Asia-Pacific and Mediterranean regions.

4 3. What do we propose? We propose to: - place a Root server inside GEANT, in one of our PoPs - from the political perspective: put Europe and the European Union as "safe and reliable counterpart to make the Internet work and increase its reliability, security and safety" (with the help of the Commission). - and eventually push for the "distributed Root Servers" solution, in order to remove ICANN standby in this topic. Our community has today 2 bodies to help in the process: - DANTE which is GEANT co-ordinating partner, and - TERENA which is the NREN s instrument for lobbying and dissemination : it can help with the relations to ICANN and its RSSAC ( Root Server System Advisory Committee). For further steps: - a close analysis of RFC 2870 is required ( to write down a proposal. In summary it gives requirements in terms of : - the server itself - connection to the Internet : high bandwidth and diversity of connectivity - security : concerning the location and the network itself - operations - communication with IANA and ICANN Actions : - approach the NRENPC to have the full green light from the NRENs on the topic : strategic decision and input on costs. - approach DANTE in order to act jointly (ie TERENA + DANTE) : TERENA will be the lobbying body and DANTE the one who will implement and manage the root server (or a NREN for the community) - Reference document : MOU for Root Name Server Operations Time frame : - this note was approved at the April 29 th TEC meeting by the TEC, and revised on September 19 th TEC meeting. - ths note was sent to NRENs and the NRENPC (mid-may meeting) which commented on it. The comments are included in this version.

5 Root server : action plan Sept 19 th TEC meeting Sept 30 th NRENPC meeting -amend the initial proposal on Peter Villemoes request and send it to NRENPC -Call the Technical WG for a new meeting (input needed to write the proposal) -1st draft proposal to be written by SJ and completed by CA -Contact Jun Murai for an appointment -1st draft to be reviewed by the Technical WG -2nd draft to be proposed to NRENPC via the list for comments+ the TERENA TEC Oct 24 th TERENA GA Oct 28 th ICANN meeting Shangai -Update to the TERENA GA Nov 28 th NRENPC meeting -Final draft to be approved by TERENA TEC + NRENPC to send it to ICANN S Jaume-Rajaonia, RENATER & C Allocchio, GARR time