IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-dnsop-resolver-priming

神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp> Tue, 16 August 2016 01:44 UTC

Return-Path: <jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com>
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 B568C12D18A for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 18:44:20 -0700 (PDT)
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=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 wX0wo7g6OpYz for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 18:44:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x236.google.com (mail-qk0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A0D812D12D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 18:44:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x236.google.com with SMTP id l2so58514901qkf.3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 18:44:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=wzOAU/VTeMeQ6qX8mrP+tl1zBfRy+7Za3FqbAzFwlz8=; b=wKWzq1rit2yYN9ylR7dveHrGCJ4t43FajvZdhh39+l9g37nxifYu3GQaGtK0cIexYM 6lh25r6aQejSTQlQV/Nx3nd7suI803BkppGSZ5KeK2oEwNLbQxdoUmJhFayKgwpNafQx HZo5l7dsX8+hffI7hHLEsq7XdXp3W8Il0p8hF/oL1W5KpYaIPTLH/jun+7NSqMon2oJt fJlJSKTrtoAS41FrcL1Tk34ULAkjaNpeZYtYfrcFzPzwGLYdNSgFp31xJvv+BvzhmiCP 6VRkcATuAr7Ou3VhWUGKgykT5afNkPm5fdm+IVkMpyZfe0MLL6g/IAxQfic3bdypCJhY tmbQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=wzOAU/VTeMeQ6qX8mrP+tl1zBfRy+7Za3FqbAzFwlz8=; b=FahA8siTrsHukEe0npWdZLAmH2Wc0/37MCkXpYH9KTDrnF+TmGPLf+7mRfKitkixZW IJ18QY/O0lUuMPG5xeAvrtWv2sAVGRYa/adABFYkQqVazVb1C1+0MEtGAHGt7nlUGFly ukYf5JKbuv6S8+SpVfbgwHmF+/Zt2hbA+Oo8d54AfOdlnVB9d4HAv/4TAQFzUmYzWbSh pIGwfuW0Sr31xiCpXlJbc9MWQSTilC63YQ5r5qniY5OIHIYawzb1DxKOt6Q3qv70XZN1 V3IUPfoodEwKP/yfmboBmt1CfsoZEY7UoSlUxlQSsHCcdRdpwcvJz9CzJeDC1eZ5/IE/ z4XQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkooutEDTM4O3+nnhOtTyOq9+lHLg5UYAtmQVUVJN2bdXEjEKk2Lc6WNNFecvfi4RbiRLtgwEcQ/G+sLHUAkg==
X-Received: by 10.55.221.131 with SMTP id u3mr34514228qku.243.1471311858449; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 18:44:18 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com
Received: by 10.237.33.154 with HTTP; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 18:44:17 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <22446.65056.67787.126514@guava.gson.org>
References: <f8c62b82-258c-2b2b-5186-c3cd8e7d7448@gmail.com> <20160805114511.3ab76c8e@pallas.home.time-travellers.org> <B0ED30A0-707B-4E07-88F3-37385CC684C4@vpnc.org> <22446.65056.67787.126514@guava.gson.org>
From: 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 18:44:17 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: csTeZqSlp3kxau1xXltBsy0RaWk
Message-ID: <CAJE_bqeWxaHR5BKxFDfg_vKOAaGLwVNy3gDmC4w-X-UQ-tQKLQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andreas Gustafsson <gson@araneus.fi>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/Q4Oo4FD4UBHu4XyZPxeBLdm_yHg>
Cc: Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-dnsop-resolver-priming
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 16 Aug 2016 01:44:21 -0000

At Sat, 13 Aug 2016 14:01:52 +0300,
Andreas Gustafsson <gson@araneus.fi> wrote:

> There is nothing wrong with existing resolvers that use the same
> timeout and retransmission strategies for priming queries as for any
> other query, and it seems wrong to me that a specific retransmission
> timeout should be required for some queries but not others.

+1.  This is actually I thought in my own read of the draft.
Mentioning a specific timeout value seems a clear overkilling (with no
apparent reason) to me, and while I wouldn't be necessarily opposed to
mentioning the retry at all, it's still awkward to me.  So I'd be
happier if it's simply removed.

--
JINMEI, Tatuya

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email