IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Asrg] RFC 6471 and "listing the Internet" as a punishment

Dave Warren <lists@hireahit.com> Sat, 28 January 2012 00:51 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=1374dfe299=lists@hireahit.com>
X-Original-To: asrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 209E721F85E4 for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:51:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.02
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.02 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.835, BAYES_40=-0.185, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 laar6jjFs3Zb for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:51:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vinny.hireahit.com (vinny.hireahit.com [72.51.42.137]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E02621F8592 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:51:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.24.0.104] by hireahit.com (vinny.hireahit.com) (SecurityGateway 2.0.7) with SMTP id SG001560247.MSG for <asrg@irtf.org>; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:51:37 -0800
Message-ID: <4F234694.3040000@hireahit.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:51:32 -0800
From: Dave Warren <lists@hireahit.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0) Gecko/20120124 Thunderbird/10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: asrg@irtf.org
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20120125114411.0c099da8@resistor.net> <20120126000255.60406.qmail@joyce.lan> <6.2.5.6.2.20120125162359.0998f438@resistor.net> <4F219AFE.9030604@mail-abuse.org>
In-Reply-To: <4F219AFE.9030604@mail-abuse.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SGOP-RefID: fgs=0 (_st=1 _vt=0 _iwf=0)
Subject: Re: [Asrg] RFC 6471 and "listing the Internet" as a punishment
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 00:51:47 -0000

On 1/26/2012 10:27 AM, Douglas Otis wrote:
> To support touted performance feature, chrome aggressively resolves 
> links in advance.  This strategy makes chrome sensitive to DNS 
> performance.  Cache in their recursive resolvers is kept current ahead 
> of requests.  People addicted to speed.  ;^)

I might be being argumentative for it's own sake (sorry), but doesn't 
this make Chrome less sensitive to DNS performance rather than more 
sensitive?

With a browser that doesn't pre-cache DNS lookups, the user is aware of 
DNS latency every time they click a link and with every resource that 
the browser loads from a different domain. Conversely, with caching, in 
most cases pre-caching every link on a page will take longer than it 
takes the user to find a link and click on it even if the DNS cache is 
extremely slow.

Now I'd agree that faster DNS servers makes a noticeable difference when 
browsing since many websites load content from a dozen or more hostname, 
but I'd argue that Chrome's precaching makes it less sensitive to slow 
DNS queries.

-- 
Dave Warren, CEO
Hire A Hit Consulting Services
http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email