Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dnsop-multiple-responses
Matthew Pounsett <matt@conundrum.com> Tue, 19 July 2016 07:37 UTC
Return-Path: <matt@conundrum.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFFD212B05F for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 00:37:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=conundrum-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HrEXDkkjJtOg for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 00:37:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x22b.google.com (mail-qk0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0143512B04F for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 00:37:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id x1so8504246qkb.3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 00:37:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=conundrum-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=T5jC/6FjorWUB+Ozj85/W/x1s8qX4vetbx7Ie1Jc+zs=; b=VvTej7DnRAxfCC3W5t9KAnYVgReOhssmpqXoezEUOscvqyJ1KD4GkD9Q29doVj+rxQ FQ7FdXPEPisn4XGEKOKYIDpm9BM70VLMV8+ULX1M8bqdTTom748bBMF+QIH6bKHPAz6U knXDpSUEqGjhjvtSP0UXW5yp4HEaCVVNs7vqomhldj5KyuaK+66ZFdQO/K8aXhsd09SW dJ/OLhve3DhSeNV4wdTI1F6al8rpzblK11Ez1GgM7CvUhUKXp3N4lvGJYA+BfgJYX3mn LiAplSi29hcjU9sqg8HImGIOQb/fcpZDcuD7N+OSoQXLPYzJyTQTQCEfdQiDjDBl6AsM CRwA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=T5jC/6FjorWUB+Ozj85/W/x1s8qX4vetbx7Ie1Jc+zs=; b=YOlSW86rxWeJvbrsQAsYcqcIm/bV2LhldLuff8tNOvxpOlMhJArl1zn1ScOWPDX18c 9OkLJmON/P3aNogQtHFZcg1k4RN/ScwONWu7KLBuxfAelgrmzSP0CfL//IkbpWlniyLo wCT+ucfUPONy1DdAkbrjsmTDguy9xgPlTSxaw34S23tmmRXhycmJjlj9aY4z5jgi0+n9 0lItX73TcWucNbUim+5D2CvDzdELxtDXQl/W6L7DY/cVtQ7phAkWnSz2yEqI2IpKBVkb 6LXZ3t2I8AG4RKC2D28da7ky/gyPeZUZu7AWPrjfa68+M78sFMwLicTbI3EkNHZfzNNi Qj1Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLLnPzqNbLyCItIEEpdv3X8+8oDTQv1LFzu0XGC2F0w5nxp1m9VU28VAdCkaeEZSRrx/XSz8zfSaH4BTQ==
X-Received: by 10.55.212.147 with SMTP id s19mr50632499qks.64.1468913857576; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 00:37:37 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.237.46.194 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 00:37:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [46.189.28.38]
In-Reply-To: <8034847F-2A8B-4A9A-9F9C-034CB4785C72@fl1ger.de>
References: <alpine.LRH.2.20.1607181050180.27489@bofh.nohats.ca> <BC65B5D1-C49B-4038-92CD-FF629AB9A75D@fl1ger.de> <CAKr6gn2WEAAm-o2appid9Nq+6p09ff0468RoyfqTRK4KMycMOw@mail.gmail.com> <0D351FB1-DA75-4859-9194-9AA8A054BF53@fl1ger.de> <CAL9jLabVJTzgCQ=TytEeVymwvwzhL4jkcgWf8zhydbjAzsL3dg@mail.gmail.com> <8034847F-2A8B-4A9A-9F9C-034CB4785C72@fl1ger.de>
From: Matthew Pounsett <matt@conundrum.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 09:37:37 +0200
Message-ID: <CAAiTEH8ZYnYLi3Fcz75Du3ehsjYmY8whQ_EQYaKkF7KqD5LqFA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ralf Weber <dns@fl1ger.de>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1149af4aafd6270537f828e9"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/6aRct1dUcEvHyiXvONERmzaVY28>
Cc: Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dnsop-multiple-responses
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 07:37:41 -0000
On 19 July 2016 at 09:19, Ralf Weber <dns@fl1ger.de> wrote: > Moin! > > On 19 Jul 2016, at 9:00, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > > On Jul 19, 2016 8:36 AM, "Ralf Weber" <dns@fl1ger.de> wrote: > >> > >> > >> Except that if you have a decent size and hot Cache with refreshing > >> these records will be in there anyway. IMHO you gained nothing, but I > >> agree with Jim Reid that it would be good to have data on this. > > > > Nothing except some DNS round trips. > > How could that matter though? > As said I don't believe we have additional round trips between the > recursive and the authoritative server in most of the cases. That is > what we need data for though. DNS and applications that use DNS have > unbelievable levels of caching. So while this all might apply to you > if you run your own resolver just for you, it's not the case in big > cache deployments most people use (be it their ISP or some big public > resolver). > > While I tend to agree that the optimization gain between the recursive and authoritative server is probably minimal, the potential gain between the recursive and the stub is huge. Other than the fact that the explanation focuses on the authoritative, I don't see any reason this needs to be limited to recursive->authoritative conversations. Indeed, with the OPT signalling a recursive could obtain the EXTRA records and provide the same optimized answers to stubs.
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Bob Harold
- Re: [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a tren… Mukund Sivaraman
- Re: [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a tren… Mukund Sivaraman
- Re: [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a tren… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a tren… Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a tren… Mukund Sivaraman
- Re: [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a tren… Paul Wouters
- [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a trend? (… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… 延志伟
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… 延志伟
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ralf Weber
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Peter van Dijk
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… 延志伟
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Jim Reid
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Jim Reid
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… 延志伟
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ralf Weber
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ralf Weber
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Matthew Pounsett
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Matthew Pounsett
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ralf Weber
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Christopher Morrow
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ralf Weber
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… George Michaelson
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Robert Edmonds
- [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dnsop-m… Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ralf Weber