Okay, I don't know if anyone else around the country (world?) has been experiencing this, but a lot of websites that I regularly visit - ESPN.Com, IGN.Com, etc. - have just been taking an excruciatingly long time to load (if they even load at all); the weird thing is that a number of other sites load up just fine, so it doesn't really seem to be a matter of bad connection speed or whatnot.
Then, Leo Laporte mentioned something on his podcast (twit.tv) that led me to this article:
Originally posted by David M. Williams Getting to the thrust and parry of robust debate, our lovable competition iTNews stated today that on May 5th the world’s top domain authorities (led by ICANN among others) will complete the first phase of the roll-out of DNSSEC across the 13 root servers – that is, the very top-level DNS servers. Oh my!
Now, their story says that DNSSEC was designed solely to prevent “man in the middle” attacks, so perhaps Brett Winterford’s DNS understanding is somewhat limited.
That’s why you should take the comment about 13 root servers with a grain of salt.
The truth is there are many hundreds of root servers at over 130 physical locations in many different countries. These aren’t run by any one organisation but by twelve. In fact, ICANN themself – who iTNews refer to – have a bold blog posting “There are not 13 root servers” dated way back in 2007.
There are networks upon networks of multiple servers all working together to handle the millions of DNS queries which the root servers receive constantly, minute upon minute, hour upon hour. Imagine the grind if the Internet depended on 13 root servers? Imagine the absolute risk if you just had to take down 13 root servers to take down the Internet?
Where the problem comes in, however, is that DNSSEC responses will be larger in size than previous DNS responses because (logically) more information is being carried, namely authentication information.
Just as the Y2K crisis arose from concern older equipment only used two-digit years to record time, so too “the DNSSEC crisis”, if we can call it that, is built on that damnable older equipment again. This time around the fear is that an older router or gateway won’t recognise the laden data packets coming its way and will block them.
Might this have anything to do with the loading issues I'm experiencing? Has anyone else noticed a number of their sites not loading properly this week?
"All RAW is these days is a cheap version of Saturday Night Live, so if you wanna tune in to watch the amazing star power of Al Sharpton and Nancy O'Dell, go ahead! Who's gonna host next week, Big Bird? Wow, that's must-see TV!" - John Morrison (10/16/09 Smackdown!)
We had one almost the whole time we've been in Minneapolis ('til Comcast took over). There were absolutely no problems having a wireless router, although in retrospect I probably should have spent a little more money for a better one. (We have a DLink.)