Re: [apps-discuss] [taugh.com-standards] Comments on draft-levine-orgboundary

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Sun, 21 July 2013 22:26 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DDF021F8E2A for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 15:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.571
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.571 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.030, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fJGxnv7OnHgq for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 15:26:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BE1421F84D9 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 15:26:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 99946 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2013 22:26:47 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent:cleverness; s=18668.51ec6027.k1307; bh=U0tLVGmtGtnSALhQ71wHAf4+pHTrcHyC8jX9dN/Cl/w=; b=IOdXcYoFPghxit/1bE7n9qrAwCitDbHFX/Iw/Xz3OuwoP3AQKicZVOmhMDjFvEE9O7s3yaWRgAiyAvhTKx+6ZhzI/NdnLJ1s7xL7HjP9mlBQxNde6pNz5dXw3N9CuTjp0pSfjMSogx1msA2aAtkobVfrB5TayDpbm/PfXS+X5fAqxbpSCPF46Vs8Lx36Qo7iFsl2h17/8WixG2xnM2Rsauf8U91cYnKKVnrBIWOxHNYsJ7n/YCNx1bHJjxHOolpd
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent:cleverness; s=18668.51ec6027.k1307; bh=U0tLVGmtGtnSALhQ71wHAf4+pHTrcHyC8jX9dN/Cl/w=; b=o8ic+GwGfJa7+GkxEcfF10iwKcBo5GHDuUJjxIJCOqcT5hi8joqEDa2EbTrCm5hjQLyz83laTkvH9QMoRJ7S5z+hwwJI9WNFAX8Sw/rIyMWyXhXLP3BdvBgyVITSWGAZ/nBUx8udx3yMoUNS9qvtdZYHrGSsIZKwWFuBceeiCxp+993gwtcYBQSC+gg2LMeBTUT2cv1/QueWQSNfdMpvTBY/lpHLXLyFfleXY04wBxjBRMz06BWMVy0Du7f44i+0
Received: (ofmipd 127.0.0.1); 21 Jul 2013 22:26:24 -0000
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 18:26:46 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1307211822450.54216@joyce.lan>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwZjaSoco7d_mCbP3YgsDESwRB5x+yXBMLB35WQo3LS5bA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL0qLwZD6uV-XZkwQBX2MEmDmnBy2opt9pgGFrAgUxnr+LJk7g@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1307210907590.15183@joyce.lan> <CAL0qLwZjaSoco7d_mCbP3YgsDESwRB5x+yXBMLB35WQo3LS5bA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
Cleverness: None detected
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Cc: IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] [taugh.com-standards] Comments on draft-levine-orgboundary
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 22:26:51 -0000

>> This argues for going back to the wildcard hack, with records like
>>
>>  *.ontario._ob.ca TXT "ontario.ca"
>>  *.toronto.ontario._ob.ca TXT "toronto.ontario.ca"
>>
>> These have lousy DNS cache behavior, but the closest encloser rule means
>> that you can find the cut point for any domain with one UDP lookup.
>
> Is there any hope that we could encourage implementers to cache these in
> the application, since they're likely to change only rarely anyway?

The lousy cache behavior is that every different name is a different 
lookup, even if it comes from the same wildcard, e.g., foo.com, 
www.foo.com, bar.com, www.bar.com, etc.  Repeated queries for the same 
name cache just fine, give or take the cache being too small.

The question is whether the rate at which hosts look for these things will 
be high enough to matter.  It seems unlikely they'd be as frequent as rDNS 
queries, and those cache just as badly.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
"I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly.