IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-serve-stale-00.txt

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Wed, 15 November 2017 04:13 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 23BA6124217 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 20:13:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 wlOX_Wti3xTt for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 20:13:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (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 5B2CE12778D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 20:13:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3yc9vw2frTz30y for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 05:13:00 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1510719180; bh=Hmk70Jr6BOsjoowoh/c5oKxbbYyBcRM3UgOu/BY5wLw=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=Wd2pULbd0Kz4ZX7eFFFq/MX0J6PXnzNpBWY/WU0CFjHvSC34RU5+Yhk7k3ncrgneN Lfrmy4sozrkl2XIp8lP5s6ABqjM4Y2EeoqD7FA4Kl5PzTaeefZTIY7r3n9CBC7bRtl HXB8sXsN1RoBE/OWbi3qdi/yasQdcrswxdlV1JP0=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xLiRNectf3HC for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 05:12:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 05:12:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6DC0C62D29; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 23:12:58 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bofh.nohats.ca 6DC0C62D29
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56BB240D35AF for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 23:12:58 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 23:12:58 -0500
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <5A0BBDD7.2070406@redbarn.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1711142311430.29343@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <150940017764.7814.6739838599217498076@ietfa.amsl.com> <23040.33307.69754.133713@gro.dd.org> <23050.45832.787089.325014@gro.dd.org> <CA+nkc8B1sVhjbn1xYu4rQNgUZGgeaqnVjW=U0nmpRdu6rvXU2Q@mail.gmail.com> <23051.40720.908131.277454@gro.dd.org> <CAHXf=0oQTVe3LFdkGLYH0XL4Vg1Fm5JdnOaOCJ59zwiMkk6MVw@mail.gmail.com> <23051.47926.538193.725450@gro.dd.org> <5A0BBDD7.2070406@redbarn.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LRH 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/MeHGkTPkYIkKBL7PzqUCY6D1vzw>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-serve-stale-00.txt
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: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 04:13:04 -0000

On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, Paul Vixie wrote:

>> It is significantly less operationally beneficial if it demands EDNS.
>
> i'm of the opposite view. we should not change behaviour without explicit 
> signaling. if that means it takes 10 years to reach 50% penetration, like 
> EDNS did, then that's the cost of doing business.

Agreed. DNS updates are slow enough as it is. Taking into account 10+
year old non-updated DNS software will make the future more even more
slowly. It's not actually helping us.

Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email