[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Purchased IPv4 Woes
- Subject: Purchased IPv4 Woes
- From: bruns at 2mbit.com (Brielle Bruns)
- Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 11:14:49 -0600
- In-reply-to: <CA+4TWFubT2Gwy6Cvp1+wih0LhgJ1LsxuPN=UxczfsGykRb+zkA@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CA+4TWFtZM1MMnaw97vEQ9uXHxFN8u7s2=o2=hK4MQZRd9hwENQ@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <CA+4TWFubT2Gwy6Cvp1+wih0LhgJ1LsxuPN=UxczfsGykRb+zkA@mail.gmail.com>
On 3/12/17 10:38 AM, Chris Knipe wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:17 PM, <valdis.kletnieks at vt.edu> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 17:59:59 +0200, Chris Knipe said:
>>
>>
>> Sure, that will work. (And no, the problem isn't the number of http hits
>> on the registries. 35,840,000,000 hits per day is the easy part...)
>>
>
>
> And yet, there's no problems of BILLIONS of queries against RBL DNS servers?
>
>
>
http == TCP
DNS == (usually) UDP
Big difference here. One requires a three way handshake
tearup/teardown, the other does not.
It is not an apples to apples comparison.
--
Brielle Bruns
The Summit Open Source Development Group
http://www.sosdg.org / http://www.ahbl.org