REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF INTERNET TRAFFIC AND ITS
IMPLICATIONS ON THE ROOT NAME SERVER ARCHITECTURE
Rami Khasawneh, Interim Dean, College of Business, Lewis University,
khasawra@lewisu.edu
Eveann Lovero, Chair, Department of Business Administration, Lewis University
loveroev@lewisu.edu
ABSTRACT
The Internet growth has been increasing steadily over the last ten years. This growth has been
demonstrated in both the number of available web sites and the number of users accessing these
sites. A web client goes through several steps before they are able to find and connect to the
destination web site. Root name servers are used to enable users to find their destination web
site, which are located all over the world. Currently there are thirteen root name servers
distributed across the globe. Most of these servers are located in the USA and Europe. None of
them are located in Africa or East Asia. Given the increased growth of Internet traffic all over the
world, the current architecture of the root name servers will not be able to support those millions
of users. This paper analyzes the global Internet traffic trends, reviews the current architecture of
the root name servers, forecasts future changes in Internet traffic and makes recommendations
for changes in the root name server architecture.
Keywords: Root Name Server, Internet Traffic, Traffic Analysis, Internet Architecture.
INTRODUCTION
The Internet has been growing over the last ten years at an increasing rate. The growth has been
at a higher rate in the USA and Europe compared to Africa and East Asia. In the coming years
this pattern might change. A web client goes through several steps before they are able to find
and connect to the destination web site. This includes contacting its local name server and other
name servers throughout the web. Root name servers (RNS) are used to enable users to find their
destination web site, which are located all over the world.
The route that an email takes when it is sent from Thailand to Philippines, for example, is not
necessarily the shortest path because of the current infrastructure of the RNS. Sitting in a coffee
shop in Thailand, I send a personal email to a friend who lives across the South China Sea in the
Philippines. My email is received almost instantly by the receiver; however, the email was not
sent to the receiver directly. Surprisingly my email was most likely sent across the Pacific Ocean
to the United States and then rerouted back to my friend in the Philippines. Under the current
root name server infrastructure this is the path an email would have taken. Asia is not the only
location that is affected by the United States based root name server architecture. Africa, South
America, Asia, Europe and the Middle East all experience a similar situation when using the
Volume V, No 2, 2004
565
Issues in Information Systems
Review and Analysis of Internet Traffic and its Implications on the Root Name Server Architecture
Internet. However, this is not going to be the case forever. The revolution has already begun to
change the current system to facilitate a more globally friendly system.
The paper starts by introducing the current root name server infrastructure, it presents a view of
the Internet traffic, examines the current root name server system concentrating primarily on the
current geographic locations of these root name servers, discusses how the current RNS
architecture affects internet traffic throughout the world, looks at alternatives to the current
layout, and discusses changes to improve the system.
Root Name Servers
There are currently thirteen servers that are lettered A through M as shown in Table 1. However,
of those thirteen root name servers, there are replica servers as well which benefit from the use of
mirrored servers. Since they are not unique servers, they do not get counted as another unique
Root Name Server. The servers are overseen by a number of organizations. The Root Server
Technical Operations Association provides the most guidance and resources for and direction to
the actual root servers. Root Servers are not managed or run by volunteers, they are
professionally owned, managed and well funded by numerous companies and organizations [9].
Server Operator
Locations
A
VeriSign Global Registry Services Dulles VA
B
Information Sciences Institute
Marina Del Rey CA
C
Cogent Communications
Herndon VA; Los Angeles;
New York City; Chicago
D
University of Maryland
College Park MD
E
NASA Ames Research Center
Mountain View CA
F
Internet Software Consortium
Ottawa; Palo Alto; San Jose CA;
New York City; San Francisco;
Madrid; Hong Kong; Los Angeles;
Rome; Auckland; Sao Paulo;
Beijing; Seoul; Moscow; Dubai
G
U.S. DOD Network
Information Center
Vienna VA
H
U.S. Army Research Lab
Aberdeen MD
I
Autonomica
Stockholm; Helsinki; Milan; London
J
Dulles VA; Mountain View CA;
Sterling VA (2 locations);
VeriSign Global Registry Services Seattle WA; Amsterdam;
Atlanta GA; Los Angeles CA;
Miami; Stockholm; London
Volume V, No 2, 2004
566
Issues in Information Systems
Review and Analysis of Internet Traffic and its Implications on the Root Name Server Architecture
K
Reseaux IP Europeans Network Coordination Centre
London; Amsterdam
L
Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers
Los Angeles
M
WIDE Project
Tokyo
Table1: Root Name Server Locations
The RNS infrastructure is not controlled by a single organization. However, some Root Name
Servers have more influence over the entire system then others.
Figure 1: Root name Server Map
RNS Locations
The Root Name Servers are located throughout the United States, Europe, and Asia. The
locations of root name servers in the United States are on the east and west coasts. The locations
of root name servers seem a bit trivial. The locations can actually be attributed to the creation of
the Internet’s existence. These US locations have been the backbone of the Internet since its
conception. Figure 1 shows a map of the root name servers and their locations.
INTERNET TRAFFIC
Just by looking at the traffic on the Internet Traffic Report, we are able to draw conclusions
about the different possible areas of growth and improvements in the form of changes that could
be implemented to make the Internet a better place. In Figure 2 you will notice that North
America (which includes the US) has by far the best traffic rating with an 89 on a scale of 100.
This rating is measured by average response times, with the higher the value the faster and more
reliable the connections. This score is also above the global average. You can see that that Asia
and Australia have a lot of work to do to catch up with North America. You can see that Asia has
an average response time four times slower than that of North America [4]. Africa and the
Volume V, No 2, 2004
567
Issues in Information Systems
Review and Analysis of Internet Traffic and its Implications on the Root Name Server Architecture
Middle East are not monitored by this organization therefore we could not make direct
comparisons to their traffic data. However, it would be safe to say their index ratings are not
nearly as high as Asia’s because of the lack of root name servers in their regions. This is,
however, changing as more people in Africa and the Middle East are using the Internet
Figure 2: Internet Traffic
CHANGES IN INTERNET TRAFFIC
The root name server system is currently not the most geographically symmetrical system when
compared to the traffic in certain areas. By investigating the different servers it is safe to say that
server M is the most crucial root name server by location due to the fact it is the only unique root
name server in Asia and the F root name server with it’s multiple duplicates is also a very
important server. Until changes were implemented just a few months ago, if the M server
became unavailable its clients would have to use other root servers in the United States or
Europe which cause some delays or even cut Internet service in certain areas of Asia. Recently
there has been a significant movement in Asia to fix the reliance on other countries. This
movement has been spearheaded by an organization called the Asian Pacific Network
Information Centre (APNIC). APNIC is one of four regional Internet registries in the world [3].
One of the problems in the RNS infrastructure is Asia’s lack of root name server representation.
Changes are needed to address this problem. These changes are especially important since China
and other Asian nations are some of the most populous countries in the world. Also they have the
data that supports large Internet traffic growth numbers in Asia, which show traffic grew 200%
in 2001 and 126% in 2002 [8]. In many cases the idea of changing the root name server system
may not be apparent, however let’s use Europe as a sample success story for why changes are
most certainly needed. In 1997, 75% of Internet traffic from Europe was to and from the United
States root name servers, just one year later after installing there one server most of the traffic
stayed within the confines of Europe [6].
ROOT NAME SERVERS INFRASTRUCTURE
In order to solve the problem of increased growth in an area, we can either add new RNS or
relocate one of the current RNS. The idea of relocating the servers has been investigated. It has
been concluded that since geographic distribution plays the most important role in the overall
performance of the root servers distributing them in accordance with the current clients would
Volume V, No 2, 2004
568
Issues in Information Systems
Review and Analysis of Internet Traffic and its Implications on the Root Name Server Architecture
create a system where all clients would have access to a root name server close to them. CAIDA,
the Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis performed a simulation to determine the
most suitable relocation strategy. It was concluded that rather than add another server to the mix
it would be better to take some of the US servers and spread them out to Europe and Asia.
However, with the control and power that is associated with these root name servers is such that
it would be hard to pry the stronghold from most of the US cities. It was also concluded that of
the eleven root name servers monitored, servers G, E, and H were the best options for relocation.
These servers were selected based on location and least requests made to each server.
Furthermore, G and H are located in the Eastern US where there are 6 root servers making up
46.2 percent of the total root servers [5]
An alternative to actually physically moving the servers is implementing something called
mirroring or “anycasting”. Anycasting is the recently developed technique of cloning one server
in multiple locations, all of which respond to the same IP address and all of which contain
identical data [3]. This technique has recently been applied to the F root server, and had allowed
any location that is suitable to be the next location for a root name server. The F root name server
answers more than 272 million DNS queries per day, making it one of the busiest DNS servers in
the world. The Internet Software Consortium (ISC) is an organization that controls the F root
name server [3].
INTERNET GROWTH AND IMPLICATIONS ON RNS INFRASTRUCTURE
The growth of Internet traffic has not been symmetric throughout the world. This fact will
continue in the future but the asymmetry would be different. This has a lot of impact on the
current RNS architecture.
RNS Infrastructure and Asia
Figure 3: Asia Traffic Index
The changes in the root name server system in Asia within the last year probably will have the
most positive affect on the overall traffic flow thru the entire system. As I mentioned earlier the
M server located in Tokyo is the only unique root name server in the area. The changes that
APNIC have made have added five new anycast root name servers of ISC’s F server to the
region. The new servers are located in Hong Kong, Seoul, Beijing, Taipei, and Singapore.
APNIC is behind this push and in a similar agreement with operators of I root name server
within the next year. This additional mirrored server will help to provide additional diversity and
spread out the reliance to more constituents [1]. Figure 3 shows the 24-hour response times in a
Volume V, No 2, 2004
569
Issues in Information Systems
Review and Analysis of Internet Traffic and its Implications on the Root Name Server Architecture
given day from InternetTrafficReport.com. As you can see they fluctuate throughout the day but
they still are hovering around 30 index points below that of the United States with it’s average 89
traffic index. Upon completion of these projects Asia’s infrastructure will be more in line with at
of the US and thus their response time should improve dramatically.
Africa
Figure 4: Traffic Routes to Africa
While the need for it’s own root name server may not be apparent on the outside, examining
Figure 4 of the Internet connectivity in Africa provides us with more of a clear understanding.
The maps show the routes taken by traffic from Columbia University in New York to each
African node (Semret). Notice that very few are direct connections to Africa, but rather head
from the US to some other region then to Africa. Africa made a large stride in the Internet
connectivity realm in September of 2003 by installing their first root name server. This serve is
an anycast server of the F root name server operated by ISC. This server is stationed at the
Johannesburg Internet Exchange (JINX) in South Africa. Experts believe this change will
improve the domain trace time from 4 microseconds to about one microsecond as well as cut the
traffic and reliance on Internet connections to the US [10].
The Middle East
Currently there are no root name servers in the Middle East. The volume of information
transferred by Russian Internet operators increased 69% year-on-year in the first quarter of 2003
to 211.9 million megabytes, the Telecommunications Ministry reported. These numbers have
helped to attract change [7]. ISC just last week announced the addition of another anycast F root
name server in coordination with the existing Moscow Internet Exchange. With this being a total
change from zero to one root name server in the region experts believe it will drastically increase
the speed of accessing web addresses for users in Russia and the surrounding regions as well as
decrease the region dependency on other foreign Internet connectivity [3].
Volume V, No 2, 2004
570
Issues in Information Systems
Review and Analysis of Internet Traffic and its Implications on the Root Name Server Architecture
CONCLUSION
While North America, mainly the United States still rules the root name server control; the tides
are beginning to change. Other countries are finally making changes to improve the overall root
name server system as well as their own connectivity to the system.
As the Internet continue to grow especially in other geographic areas such as Africa and east
Asia and with the current movement spawned by the numerous organizations including ISC and
APNIC, Within 10 years Asia, Africa, and the Middle East will maintain a stronger position in
the root name server infrastructure. The root name servers operating in the United States will not
be surrendered and moved because of the underlying power and control that they hold and the
number of users accessing in the USA. ISC and other group will continue their efforts in
mirroring or anycasting servers across the globe to help eliminate dependencies on foreign
countries and help improve traffic indexes across the globe.
Most of the changes occurring now with respect to the RNS infrastructure are not enough to
improve the Internet access time and to provide more control for other areas. New RNS servers
not just a mirrored RNS need to be added in order to improve the Internet access time for users
in areas like Africa and the Middle East.
REFERENCES
1. APNIC. (2003). APNIC Announces New Internet Root Server in Asia Pacific; Taipei and
Singapore Next to Receive Critical Internet Infrastructure Services.
2. DNS Damage – Measurements at a Root Server.
http://www.caida.org/outreach/presentations/ietf0112/dns.damage.html.
3. Internet Software Consortium. (2003). http://www.isc.org.
4. Internet Traffic Report. http://www.internettrafficreport.com.
5. Lee, Tony, Huffaker, Bradley, Fomenkov, Marina, & Claffy, K.C. (2003). On the problem of
optimization of DNS root servers’ placement.
6. Levy, Craig. (2000). Europe is routing less of its Internet traffic via the USA, but Africa lags
significantly.
7. Naumenko, Laurisa. (2003) Moscow Times. (June 18, 2003). 10% of Russians Now Use the
Internet.
8. RHK, (2003). Asia-Pacific Internet Traffic Increases 126% but Growth Rate Slows.
http://www.rhk.com
9. Root Server Technical Operations Assn. http://www.root-servers.org
10. Vecchiatto, Paul. (2003). Africa’s first root domain name server installed.
Volume V, No 2, 2004
571
Issues in Information Systems