[DNSOP] TCP/UDP performances
Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 24 November 2009 13:44 UTC
Return-Path: <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E8BC3A6A46 for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:44:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E1jcl2DvWbo5 for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:44:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.158]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A2D53A69A1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:44:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id e12so1244438fga.13 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:43:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=6k7QePBGAx0gPVysDcRj11AuY0sQdIZkUQJmdnSKPt8=; b=Hifh5D//lNFVkvPSsEWK5UwnFfp6okECRJn6EbeqzSurPEz0Y0sUwq0ozXl7CxUI2J R50xeqFgh0dTHBhbMf4QQDRL0EXBZk/MuJOS0dLo7v2tn8UcTI443S6WWBW+QOq1W6gp CDc9uBnEu3SMjqmoIRHYnc8Q/uWDzVyl8SC3w=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=tywZoUHcy/eJfI1NNbt0V6CaW4NzwCRIpeJ518/B/3I/NIoP9h5gaLLkKYuldb6FOe SRmoCzu23puEFit9/XuxwxeHbQuz5CJ2LZip+waQhw6e9/Av9tkfZ5CKq8Pk7/YeDUno kMejL8HPZfT1vLR8WcCmkk3KSHMjS3KvyCcBM=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.102.226.17 with SMTP id y17mr2792904mug.67.1259070231063; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:43:51 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:43:51 +0100
Message-ID: <51eafbcb0911240543m38c27080xc9c54cc1c3f6036c@mail.gmail.com>
From: Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0016364d205bdeae7204791e210a"
Subject: [DNSOP] TCP/UDP performances
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:44:01 -0000
Hi, We are looking for measurements on the following points : - How TCP affects DNS servers performances compared to UDP? - Proportion of clients that switch to TCP? - What kind of client are they? Are they those that do not implement EDNS0? Feel free to provide any paper links you know. Regards, Daniel -- Daniel Migault Orange Labs -- Security +33 6 70 72 69 58
- [DNSOP] TCP/UDP performances Daniel Migault
- Re: [DNSOP] TCP/UDP performances Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] TCP/UDP performances Sebastian Castro