Re: [dnsext] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-vandergaast-edns-client-ip-00.txt

[Ted Hardie <[e-mail]>]

Howdy,

On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Nicholas Weaver
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> a)  Not everything is HTTP or HTTPS and supports such clean redirections.
>
And this is one of the clearest point in this whole debate:  CDNs serve one
sort of application, which has a host of other methods in play (redirects,
content negotiation, an UPGRADE mechanism to change the security characteristics
of the channel).   Many other applications do not have any of these or use
fundamentally different approaches (store-and-forward protocols, for example,
are pretty unlikely to use a redirect-style approach).

Are we expecting the client's interaction with the DNS to be different on an
application basis here?  Specifically, do we expect the DNS query to look
different when the browser makes a request than when the mail stack does?
How realistic is that, really, without the browser maintaining its own stack?
Isn't it more likely that this will be turned on or off globally?  If
it does vary, what
does that mean for intermediate caching?  Does
this create yet another pressure to reduce cache times?

On a slightly different point, I think Stephane's point on the prevalence of
tunnels in Mobile IP situations is being lost here--we not only have the case
of proxy/tunnels configured for specific applications, but the MIP tunnels which
may be in play here--and that hits a lot of mobile clients that I fear are not
captured in netalyzr data.

regards,

Ted Hardie