IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ah-dnsext-rfc1995bis-ixfr-02

Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz> Fri, 17 June 2011 15:41 UTC

Return-Path: <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz>
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4424911E81BB for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 08:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.065
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.065 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.534, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jnBqD-43ddeS for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 08:41:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stora.ogud.com (stora.ogud.com [66.92.146.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56DE811E8179 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 08:41:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from work-laptop-2 (nyttbox.md.ogud.com [10.20.30.4]) by stora.ogud.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p5HFfRhZ003495; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 11:41:28 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz)
Received: from [10.31.201.23] by work-laptop-2 (PGP Universal service); Fri, 17 Jun 2011 11:41:28 -0400
X-PGP-Universal: processed; by work-laptop-2 on Fri, 17 Jun 2011 11:41:28 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a06240801ca21246f76de@[10.31.201.23]>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikoVVaXF2_LJ3KHm6P7oFpfC+n2tw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4DB81069.3080404@nic.cz> <4DF9B5BD.7010900@nic.cz> <a06240803ca1fd7525c50@10.31.201.23> <BANLkTinjRDHyKH-tLEoejodXb2+7qQLO7w@mail.gmail.com> <a06240801ca2102b8b4f2@10.31.201.23> <BANLkTikoVVaXF2_LJ3KHm6P7oFpfC+n2tw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 11:41:24 -0400
To: Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com>
From: Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.20.30.4
Cc: Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz>, dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ah-dnsext-rfc1995bis-ixfr-02
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 15:41:33 -0000

At 11:02 -0400 6/17/11, Brian Dickson wrote:

>IXFR does not need to be over UDP.

The point is that IXFR can be over UDP, not that it could be over TCP.

>If the IXFR query is sent over TCP, the answer will either be an IXFR
>(for real), or an IXFR which includes the whole zone.

I don't think there is an understanding of IXFR.  I'd suggest reading 
1995 again and checking it against your code.  Perhaps your code 
missed something.

>There are plenty of zones that require IXFR-ONLY in order to
>efficiently and effectively process zone updates.
>

Can you give me an example how your implementation is less 
"efficient" without IXFR-only and how you would alter your 
implementation to make use of it.

That would help establish a justification...
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis
NeuStar                    You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468

I'm overly entertained.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email