[DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

"Ralf Weber" <dns@fl1ger.de> Mon, 05 November 2018 07:55 UTC

Return-Path: <dns@fl1ger.de>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC04E12F1AC for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 23:55:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iq1S1OEzVAMq for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 23:55:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.guxx.net (nyx.guxx.net []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A5DE12EB11 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 23:55:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by nyx.guxx.net (Postfix, from userid 107) id CC1855F40404; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 08:55:26 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [] (dhcp-8a4f.meeting.ietf.org []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by nyx.guxx.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 301E25F40221 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 08:55:23 +0100 (CET)
From: Ralf Weber <dns@fl1ger.de>
To: dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2018 14:55:19 +0700
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.12.1r5552)
Message-ID: <6C4AA784-21F6-41E6-9C63-BAF6816A0567@fl1ger.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/NBqOzszxZIx3yE2rPngbdLeuNvg>
Subject: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 05 Nov 2018 07:55:30 -0000


As the mic line was closed after Mark, and I didn’t have anything new 
to say meaning I support the draft but don’t like the EDNS options 
before Mark spoke I use email to comment on Marks comments.

We already have a mechanism where the Authority tells the resolver how 
long to cache stuff it’s TTL and we have in pretty much all modern 
resolvers mechanisms to cap the lower and upper bounds of that, which 
means we occasionally ignore that. Serve-stale just adds to that. Having 
a new knob where the authority tells the resolvers on how long to serve 
stale that then will be ignored/capped just increases complexity with no 

Also if you integrated the serve stale with prefetching the actual 
timers visible to the users go down to zero as you probably already 
recursed before the record expired and didn’t get the answer. Maybe 
you should note that in the timer section.

So long