IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-song-dnsop-tcp-primingexchange-00.txt

Davey Song <songlinjian@gmail.com> Fri, 28 November 2014 09:25 UTC

Return-Path: <songlinjian@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55E041A1AF0 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 01:25:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 9_Hzx6Rro0TC for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 01:25:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qg0-x22e.google.com (mail-qg0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E8251A1ADD for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 01:25:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qg0-f46.google.com with SMTP id z107so4442214qgd.33 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 01:25:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Js0vHBBl8mexBuxiXT9BiMcC5GjRtXakYoX9bmjC2SA=; b=ruxLWAQ6irtCW4HvqM+IRjOkuk41Kk5snT5wcgHTwdHhUSI1wCKfEiRMtMvm85Vk7z f91c0/JEjGlEpsyy2hJTdTHbtTudlIh9YV/ASX0lOepSIhSyoBgahKsqUaVb7+nevgvA GYGuTyTWO9mQKXAt9qQRmvN8P5S00BuVmoLvdpUAOZclrEEAdlGdXZkRoA91WOBomTZT aqzK6w6See4f+bdkZ++0I4kbIEo/YKMu3Vn1duWby6Xc5zxUOemVyh1x90DRAQKpMffO b34C7UVT9dslxVkaF1wUnIwwe6JLCMoJG0aIVDyIzTD8l9quGGtT3w+jXFMz87agUYWd 16cw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.224.112.2 with SMTP id u2mr60874043qap.14.1417166752862; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 01:25:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.140.91.202 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 01:25:52 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <FFAC9976-D502-4AAE-AB7D-8A869CB140AB@vpnc.org>
References: <20141126190228.2644.32272.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAAObRXJM1Ucu3RtJCZPaw2ss0+ZBXxnDyyUvshuAnqEQYEi2XA@mail.gmail.com> <FFAC9976-D502-4AAE-AB7D-8A869CB140AB@vpnc.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 17:25:52 +0800
Message-ID: <CAAObRXKYOBS-uhv4mozz3i0Y3S5+gP4b0-QzV6vC3mvxe1WRNg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Davey Song <songlinjian@gmail.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b5d2f60e458ed0508e7d8d4"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/8cLb2fLwLDsMLx5ln1z1lJSGmvw
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-song-dnsop-tcp-primingexchange-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 09:25:55 -0000

Hi Paul Hoffman, I appreciate your comments which touches the key point of
my concern.

Yes, two pages is enough to address the problem with your suggestion. It
actually turns off the EDNS0 during Priming Exchange, right ?

On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
wrote:

> On Nov 26, 2014, at 11:18 AM, Davey Song <songlinjian@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi folks, I just post a draft on Priming Exchange over TCP. Comments are
> welcome!
>
> The proposed solution is not needed as long as the resolver that using the
> priming exchange can fall back to TCP. A different approach to the document
> would be:
>
>    Motivation: The root zone is longer than 512 octets,
>    so responses to priming queries are truncated.
>
>    Requirement: All resolvers that perform priming
>    queries MUST be able to use TCP as specified in
>    RFC 1035 when performing the priming query.
>
> That should be an RFC of less than two pages, and would not involve making
> priming queries special enough to require a protocol change for them.
>
> --Paul Hoffman

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email