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

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Mon, 22 July 2013 01:10 UTC

Return-Path: <superuser@gmail.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 B72DD21F9C32 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 18:10:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.579
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.579 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.020, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 4aKRn-BT42IN for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 18:10:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x231.google.com (mail-wg0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7182921F9A50 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 18:10:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wg0-f49.google.com with SMTP id a12so5341299wgh.28 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 18:10:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=7aSPLUx0v/j23YYsXjmcWc9PctzByRZ7BSoij0riWJg=; b=zDoRWQI2LnpOQiFi3J/fhYzYuogQlSrN06cjQlWbBznuglpWG+voPvltXLgKHeN30q a840WuoxbKq61JfdUeKbLhqdylws6Qs13rQQJSN13fCwVsWGE4tWjRy9/JvNpSC6uGQw IBtQsngOPIGRgLqyZ+Te0rCLnKc2AOzT8DPfBb1T5GpG61A0uGuc+VUH3ZhCo7nEAOf4 S1QghFz7kZ0yc8YdDps4vmtUU5uqAl3SO/Ol0H04qDMPQcwp0w2gux/aUgbbj6fZN4Jn +L4z+Osun3c6TFZMldkLaXydVInATL35m7by6UGZ68inOGbXi6WtMVtnXqIDRa/7wOx5 w0DA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.48.116 with SMTP id k20mr18262420wjn.23.1374455423560; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 18:10:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.90.16 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 18:10:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1307211822450.54216@joyce.lan>
References: <CAL0qLwZD6uV-XZkwQBX2MEmDmnBy2opt9pgGFrAgUxnr+LJk7g@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1307210907590.15183@joyce.lan> <CAL0qLwZjaSoco7d_mCbP3YgsDESwRB5x+yXBMLB35WQo3LS5bA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1307211822450.54216@joyce.lan>
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 18:10:23 -0700
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwau4LT04pPZkn7uKUrVcT0mzZbY3vHtT45w=c6+AtYytg@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
To: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7ba975e647f42804e20f5709"
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: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:10:29 -0000

On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 3:26 PM, John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

> 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.
>

Couldn't application level caching with some knowledge of this system
reduce the lousy caching?  For example, if through this system you can
learn that .com is a point below which all domains are in their own OB, you
don't need to look up _ob.com anymore (or at least not for a really long
time).

-MSK