[dns-wg] WG comment on DNSMON changes

Colleagues,

(* hat off *)

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 04:04:34PM +0100, Jim Reid wrote:

> I would be grateful if you could express your approval or rejection of the NCC's approach and proposed time-line. Details are at https://labs.ripe.net/Members/romeo_zwart/copy_of_proposed-time-lines-for-phasing-out-the-old-ttm-based-dnsmon.

[...]

> I'd appreciate it if you can comment on the list to indicate that you approve (or disapprove) of the current proposal and/or time-line.

I've taken the liberty to copy the timeline here, so we can actually
discuss it (could have discussed it) on the list. Labs is a nice idea,
but content/external maybe not so.

> Old and new DNSMON will be available in parallel until end of June 2014.
> Configuration updates for existing zones will only be applied to the new DNSMON.
> Data collection in the old DNSMON service will be terminated by 1 July 2014.

Given the increasingly painful dependency on the old TTM system, and taking
into account the warning time given to us customers, this transition deadline appears
reasonable to me: "no objection".

> Data visualisation of (historic) measurement data provided by the old DNSMON will be available until the end of 2014.
> Raw data from the old DNSMON measurements will be kept available for a longer period. We are investigating ways to keep the old data available indefinitely.

As I said at the microphone in Warsaw, I think it would be a plus not only to
maintain the old data, but also some way to visualize it, so some trends over
the years can be looked up (literally, not only dug in the raw data) in comparison.
That does not imply running an unmaintained or unmaintainable system indefinitely,
neither does it postpone the shutdown date for said system. Getting the viz back
in some "reasonable" time would be great.

The other point I want to submit "in writing" is that I am not convinced by the
reasoning that led to giving up the two hour delay.  The fact that "measurements
are public" or "anybody could set up their own measurements" neglects the very
value added by the (new) visualisation: not only is there an instant feedback
channel, but that channel is _the_ well reputed source.  In 1980s' words:
the revolutionary army not only has a transmitter, but it has direct write
access to the 20:00 main news.
Doesn't give me sleepless nights, but I question the unilateral decision
based on that fatalistic reasoning.

Regards,
  Peter (* still hatless *)