Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dnsop-multiple-responses
"Ralf Weber" <dns@fl1ger.de> Tue, 19 July 2016 06:36 UTC
Return-Path: <dns@fl1ger.de>
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 8787212B01C for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 23:36:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.131
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.131 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.77, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 m49WKyD763HX for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 23:36:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.guxx.net (smtp.guxx.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:a0:322c::25:42]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97C0712B01A for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 23:36:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by nyx.guxx.net (Postfix, from userid 107) id D0A325F40674; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 08:36:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [64.89.232.131] (unknown [62.217.47.18]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by nyx.guxx.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 11D8A5F404E9; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 08:36:02 +0200 (CEST)
From: Ralf Weber <dns@fl1ger.de>
To: George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 08:36:02 +0200
Message-ID: <0D351FB1-DA75-4859-9194-9AA8A054BF53@fl1ger.de>
In-Reply-To: <CAKr6gn2WEAAm-o2appid9Nq+6p09ff0468RoyfqTRK4KMycMOw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <alpine.LRH.2.20.1607181050180.27489@bofh.nohats.ca> <BC65B5D1-C49B-4038-92CD-FF629AB9A75D@fl1ger.de> <CAKr6gn2WEAAm-o2appid9Nq+6p09ff0468RoyfqTRK4KMycMOw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.4r5234)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/S2m_Y7ySKV7Imjj4es5ayOPJcJg>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dnsop-multiple-responses
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, 19 Jul 2016 06:36:05 -0000
Moin! On 19 Jul 2016, at 8:18, George Michaelson wrote: > "in reality" is skewing the story. You don't foresee a usecase, but > you do foresee abuse? So deploy cookies or move to TCP, or DTLS or > some other cost space where amplify implies special knowledge, or cost > on the amplifier. Which then introduces a deployment or scaling problem. Granted for Google scaling DNS to TCP is not a problem, but it might be for others. [..] > PS a use case as I understand it, is people (like 8.8.8.8) who see > patterns in otherwise unrelated DNS query and could potentially short > circuit in time, and query chain sequence things which are utterly > predictable. You ask for A? we know in 2 ms you will ask for AAAA, or > DS/DNSKEY of the parent or... because.. well because we have the query > dynamics in the space, and we know what we see. So lets put things > into answers and start converting clients to understand this, and we > drop query load significantly and speed up DNS closure. This feels > like optimizations we'd expect in other protocols. Except that if you have a decent size and hot Cache with refreshing these records will be in there anyway. IMHO you gained nothing, but I agree with Jim Reid that it would be good to have data on this. So long -Ralf
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Bob Harold
- Re: [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a tren… Mukund Sivaraman
- Re: [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a tren… Mukund Sivaraman
- Re: [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a tren… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a tren… Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a tren… Mukund Sivaraman
- Re: [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a tren… Paul Wouters
- [DNSOP] Asking for TCP and/or cookies: a trend? (… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… 延志伟
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… 延志伟
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ralf Weber
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Peter van Dijk
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… 延志伟
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Jim Reid
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Jim Reid
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… 延志伟
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ralf Weber
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ralf Weber
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Matthew Pounsett
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Matthew Pounsett
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ralf Weber
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Christopher Morrow
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ralf Weber
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… George Michaelson
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Robert Edmonds
- [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dnsop-m… Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] my lone hum against draft-wkumari-dns… Ralf Weber