<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/xhtml; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body><div style="font-family: sans-serif;"><div class="plaintext" style="white-space: normal;"><p dir="auto">Excellent additional details to include in our report. I agree that we should not try to rank the risks, as both are important. They are simply different risks.</p>
<p dir="auto">With respect to DNSSEC, I have a recollection of at least one conversation where I remember us saying we should not sign the zones at this time, as a subjective point of view not a technical one. Personally, I would prefer we choose to sign because in general we should, although I’m not absolutely committed to it as I recognize that perhaps for now, operationally, it might be better to start without signing and seek to move to it as quickly as practicable.</p>
<p dir="auto">I’ll support whatever our majority believes.</p>
<p dir="auto">Jim</p>
<br><p dir="auto">On 14 Sep 2023, at 10:25, Jeff Schmidt wrote:</p>
</div><blockquote class="embedded" style="margin: 0 0 5px; padding-left: 5px; border-left: 2px solid #777777; color: #777777;"><div id="682E5583-48A1-4EC7-871D-FE4879003163">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1;">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Thinking a little more about this on my second cup of coffee. The two RZCR “types” present different risk profiles. One isn’t “more” or “less” risky than the other – they’re just different. More different than I initially thought. And they both “grow” the root zone as measured in kilobytes.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">First entry into root (delegation to TRT):</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">+ Increases net size of root database</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">+ Likely fewer net records due to “research quality” delegation (~2 NS)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">+ Likely to add glue (~2 A, ~2 AAAA)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">+ No DNSSEC? (*)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">+ NSEC, RRSEC (+1 each)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Re-delegation from TRT to Registry:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">+ No new string added to root database</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">+ Likely to add glue (~4 A, ~4 AAAA)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">+ Likely additional net records due to “production quality” delegation (~4 NS)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">+ DNSSEC (large records, most common error mode, ~2 DS)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">+ NSEC, RRSEC (recalculated)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">There’s no free lunch here. Both types present risks. The root zone “grows” during both types – in the first, it “grows” in units of “database entries” (there’s a new TLD string) and associated kilobytes. In the second, while there isn’t a new TLD string, the root zone will still “grow” in records and kilobytes due to addition of production quality records and DNSSEC.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Jeff</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">(*) Have we discussed signing these TRT delegations?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span></p>
<div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From:</span></b> <span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">NCAP-Discuss <ncap-discuss-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Schmidt via NCAP-Discuss <ncap-discuss@icann.org><br>
<b>Date:</b> Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 8:27 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> James Galvin <galvin@elistx.com>, ncap-discuss@icann.org <ncap-discuss@icann.org><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [NCAP-Discuss] Root Zone Change Rates</span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Jim said:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">> 2. We all agree that root zone changes are serious business. Looking at</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">> the two changes that will need to be done it is important to note that</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">> only one of them, the first one, is related to the root scaling concerns.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">> It is that first change that will add the applied for TLD string to the root</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">> zone. The second change is not an addition, it is changing existing</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">> information. We need to separate these points of concern.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Agree they are different. The first is adding the TLD, which is net new entries into the root. The second is a re-delegation which doesn’t change the size of the root, but represents a unit of work for IANA-Verisign, requires review, and presents opportunity for errors. The RSSAC report mentions a concern about “churn” (the latter type) in addition to net size growth (the former type). Root zone changes are not zero risk.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Timing will get interesting in the 2030(?) round. Some applications (existing Registry using pre-evaluated RSP) could go quite fast because they need little to no 2012-style evaluation. While evaluation was the long pole in 2012, these collisions and IANA/root scaling limitations may be the long pole in future rounds. Which means there will be additional scrutiny.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Thanks,<br>
Jeff</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></blockquote>
<div class="plaintext" style="white-space: normal;">
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>