Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTTP in dnsop?
"Mark Delany" <f4t@november.emu.st> Thu, 17 December 2015 20:20 UTC
Return-Path: <f4t@november.emu.st>
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 268591B307E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 12:20:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1] 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 datFZIZcC208 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 12:20:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from f5.bushwire.net (f5.bushwire.net [199.48.133.46]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF9F31B3079 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 12:20:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by f5.bushwire.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id D9925AC8D2; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 12:20:24 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/simple; d=emu.st; s=2015; t=1450383624; bh=QLOzKOY7evWJVNQghegt+L5+WUg=; h=Comments:Received:Date:Message-ID:From:Mail-Followup-To:To: Subject:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition: In-Reply-To; b=QlcQe8lyidJI0wS0qb11WCkama2FCkzFKNWtzlyb71dX/Cl/phrWwIJSxcYmLYM0g 5dIPLoepoTMYtGvspyiEfBBiDpKLOLQms9zaDoMkzqDdRqxniaARRQwsWserh3lV7G d1D6iGaj59E+7kS6t/gvvTSA0pmexv16ah7Vd8jc=7Vd8jc=
Comments: QMDA 0.3
Received: (qmail 40711 invoked by uid 1001); 17 Dec 2015 20:20:24 -0000
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 20:20:24 +0000
Message-ID: <20151217202024.40710.qmail@f5-external.bushwire.net>
From: Mark Delany <f4t@november.emu.st>
Mail-Followup-To: dnsop@ietf.org
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <20151217020754.6915b71c@pallas.home.time-travellers.org> <20151217020803.GA28588@mycre.ws> <20151217210623.620dee07@pallas.home.time-travellers.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20151217210623.620dee07@pallas.home.time-travellers.org>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/R6af7IIIzblOKbMZXOyV4lArW3Y>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTTP in dnsop?
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: <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: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 20:20:28 -0000
It might be obvious to most, but should there be a section on out-of-order processing of requests? That the request pipeline order doesn't necesarily match the response pipeline order is particularly unexpected in some protocols (and likely non-compliant), such as HTTP < 2.0 Mark.
- [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTTP in… Shane Kerr
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… George Michaelson
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Robert Edmonds
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Shumon Huque
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Shane Kerr
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Mark Delany
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Tim Wicinski
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Mark Delany
- [DNSOP] "anything goes" (was Re: Should we try to… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [DNSOP] "anything goes" (was Re: Should we tr… joel jaeggli
- Re: [DNSOP] "anything goes" (was Re: Should we tr… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [DNSOP] "anything goes" (was Re: Should we tr… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Mark Delany
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Mark Delany
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] "anything goes" (was Re: Should we tr… Tim Wicinski
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Tony Finch
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Tony Finch
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… George Michaelson
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… George Michaelson
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… George Michaelson
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [DNSOP] Should we try to work on DNS over HTT… Tony Finch