Re: [DNSOP] draft-jabley-dnsop-ordered-answers

[Paul Vixie <[e-mail]>]

On Friday, November 06, 2015 01:05:00 PM Bob Harold wrote:
> I thought of suggesting that "clients SHOULD accept answers in any order".
> But on second thought, this increases code complexity, for no real
> benefit.  And we will probably see more low-compute-power devices doing
> some basic DNS lookups that need to keep code to a minimum.

i agree with this conclusion but not with your reasons as stated.

as marka pointed out up-thread, RFC 1035 already describes answer construction 
in a certain order, and in that sense, the jabley--ordered-answers draft is 
merely a clarification in case anyone misunderstood 1035's ordering 
implications.

however, low-compute-power devices in 2015 already have 10X the computing 
power of the VAX 8350 i ran all of DEC.COM's e-mail through (for ~130K 
employees) in 1989. we don't have to worry about their computational burden 
now, and that trend will accelerate. which is a good thing, because DNSSEC 
must become ubiquitous, all the way to the edge.

-- 
P. Vixie