Re: The truth of the matter

[durrell@innocence.com (Bryant Durrell)]

Eugene Kashpureff writes:
> No ? I'll waste my time showing you the ones that *do* resolve 
> AlterNIC enhanced DNS....
> 
> http://www.alternic.net/users.html
> 
> It's an old list, from August. There's alot of name servers listed.
> I'll run the robot, and post an updated list of AlterNIC aware name
> servers Real Soon Now. I want it for the new T-Shirts.
> 
> Why is it important ? Consensus is hard to measure. But if we do
> have all these users of our namespace, that's alot of netizens.
> 
> More than the ISOC membership maybe.

Oh, I always love this one.

OK.  For starters, the list has a number of duplicates -- even without
checking for cases where a machine has more than one name.  After
forcing all the names to lower case, there are 220 servers in that
list.  sort -u leaves 188.  That's about 1/7th duplicates.  

Checking the 188 remaining servers to see if they actually do resolve
alter.nic, one appears not to exist any longer (or at least, I can't
get an IP for it).  Of the remaining 187, 22 were unable to provide me
with an IP for alter.nic.  In all fairness, six of those were simply
unable to resolve *anything* before timing out, but I'm not sure that
I'd be proud of having nameservers like that on my list.

In conclusion, from Eugene's list of 220 nameservers, only 165 were
able to resolve alter.nic.  From the real list of 188 nameservers, 22
appear to have stopped using the Alternic roots since August -- a loss
of greater than 10% of his user base.

Can't wait to see the new list...

-- 
Bryant Durrell (sysadmin, cynic, coyote) | "well, it seems doable so we should
durrell@innocence.com / durrell@bofh.net |  do it.  if we can't then we should
http://www.innocence.com/~durrell        |  get no biscuits."  -- tim@meer.net