IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] Fwd: RFC 2308 & RFC 4035

John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> Sun, 27 February 2011 18:29 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1008E3A6A19 for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:29:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.652
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.652 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.547, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BsLLzWysWnvo for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:29:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [64.57.183.53]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D62333A6A00 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:29:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 6090 invoked from network); 27 Feb 2011 18:30:42 -0000
Received: from mail1.iecc.com (64.57.183.56) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 27 Feb 2011 18:30:42 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:vbr-info; s=19a4.4d6a9852.k1102; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=+4cgJCEk4G/PPGRY+AxGpI0OzO2K0S/NwdutzS0frzY=; b=mowhlnOcFXgUzw3oTQovdHJmcsH7/qxTu2zF4clmW/IqjdTZcgexz4HBW3zXo1myzvA49w1mFfOTYe2NIAbHs1i+88TCSoe3Kww/VG7V6W9j25R8KYJDACkE7MUBfWqsLRh2F/puGK3blJoAU6fWKzgo8ztC4RmEtd0fWOp7tZs=
VBR-Info: md=iecc.com; mc=all; mv=dwl.spamhaus.org
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 18:30:42 -0000
Message-ID: <20110227183042.6563.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: dnsext@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <4D68B464.8040409@nlnetlabs.nl>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Fwd: RFC 2308 & RFC 4035
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 18:29:46 -0000

>- From an efficiency point, using cached NSECs helps; but for caches the
>nxdomain and nodata traffic is a lot smaller than e.g. for roots.

Don't assume that.  If the zone is a DNSBL, there will be a whole lot
of nxdomain queries, particularly in an IPv6 world where spamware hops
to a new IP on every message.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email