1. Measuring DNS services at APNIC A work-in-progress report Reverse DNS SIG APRICOT, Bangkok 5 March 2002

2. Overview Motivations Methodology Initial outcomes Future work Questions

3. Motivations Improve APNIC reporting function –EC response to member survey –Strategic regional/national relevancy DNS traffic reflects end-user usage DNS efficiencies affect global service quality Improve monitoring of APNIC services Check load balance between servers, locations Early warning of problems Review load balance when network changes, new services added

4. Methodology APNIC DNS nameservers sampled every 15 minutes –currently approx 8-10Mb named.run dumps saved as compressed images for future use # ndc debug;sleep 60; ndc nodebug

5. Methodology cont. Analyse sample –Requestors Source of datagrams –Requested objects.in-addr.arpa.ip6.int, etc Collate using RIR allocation maps –Tag data by ISO CC of nearest allocation boundary –Can sort by volume of requests, CC etc.

6. RIR Map Issues Network licenceholders can use the network anywhere –CC of allocation/assignment record Not authoritative source CC of request. –80:20 rule on likely location of network? Many legacy networks list as US but are located worldwide Too many addresses unknown CC

7. Initial Outcomes Example load shares –To Brisbane and Tokyo CN/TW ID/HK NZ/KR Query rates –2 week sample –IPv6 query rate Top 10 requesting CC by server location

8. CN,TW serve by server location

9. ID,HK serve by server location

10. NZ, KR serve by server location

11. DNS server query rate

12. IPv6 requests

13. Top 20 requesting CC by server location US549484US541906 ??129886CN129870 CN107425??123195 KR102130JP121836 AU94366KR101654 JP74039UK48588 DE55991CA39253 UK53420DE34919 CA43757TW29439 CH32771HK17210 FR22953AU16826 NL21555SG16816 TW19811NL15633 AustraliaJapan

14. Future Work Table of CC to requested DNS RR –More computationally expensive –May not be completely accurate –Web ‘select-your-own-CC’ interface Apply same methodology –Web –Whois requester,requested-data inline in logfiles, so much simpler to tabulate –Consistent methodology for monitoring APNIC resource usage

15. Future Work cont. Account for measurement-induced errors –Additional cost to DNS server to write named.run file Is named logging ‘cheaper’ ? –Avoid methods which query (www,whois,dns) Improve methodology –Use DNS logging not debug dumps Make data available online –APNIC values interpretation of raw data by the wider community

16. Questions George Michaelson ggm@apnic.net