IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] avoiding fragmented DNS-over-UDP

ietf-dnsops@johnbond.org Tue, 27 March 2018 17:18 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-dnsops@johnbond.org>
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 BA08612946D for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 10:18:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 EqghR76nSnSy for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 10:18:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ssh.johnbond.org (ssh.johnbond.org [IPv6:2607:f740:e::f2d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9D261289B0 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 10:18:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [2a00:23c4:fb5a:b800:a8c8:6e8b:c89a:748b] (helo=broadband.bt.com) by ssh.johnbond.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89_1 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <ietf-dnsops@johnbond.org>) id 1f0kef-00099d-D0 for dnsop@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 09:12:33 +0000
From: ietf-dnsops@johnbond.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 18:17:57 +0100
References: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1803211607160.16357@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1803211607160.16357@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
Message-Id: <C8DB5D1B-DE6C-4CF5-A78C-0A3BB02C1C39@johnbond.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on ssh.johnbond.org); Exit with error (see exim mainlog)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/6t5BAS-UvYQ9ZzGoJrsqDz9CLUY>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] avoiding fragmented DNS-over-UDP
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 27 Mar 2018 17:18:03 -0000

> On 21 Mar 2018, at 16:10, Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> wrote:
> 
> Here are some sketchy notes on what this might say...
> 
> * client side
> 
>    * implement PMTUD by probing with diferent EDNS buffer sizes
> 
>      * does it make sense for a server to try to work out if the client is
>      doing PMTUD, or is that too much complexity for too little benefit?
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-andrews-dnsext-udp-fragmentation-01 is worth a mention specifically in relation to PMTUD

John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email