Re: [DNSOP] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-02

[Ray Bellis <[e-mail]>]

On 12/07/2016 14:35, John Dickinson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I think that a bit more should be said on the problem statement in
> the introduction.
> 
> I might have missed it, but what entity originates the query? Stub or
> resolver?

It's suitable for both.  It could perhaps benefit from being spelled out
more explicitly.

> You say that “ A caching recursive server receiving a Multiple QTYPE
> Option SHOULD attempt to fill its positive and negative caches with
> all of the specified RR types before returning its response to the
> client.” won’t this run the risk of delaying a response to the
> client?

That's maybe a little strong - it could probably be weakened to "MAY".

> You say a server can “omit some (or all) of the records for the
> additional RR types” in the case of truncation. Given the previous
> quote, how should a caching recursive server behave in this case?
> Query again for the missing QTYPES or switch to TCP?

I think either would be acceptable.  The server shouldn't actually set
the TC bot in those cases, so the client wouldn't be expected to
automatically failover to TCP.

> I am also wondering how this interacts with
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wkumari-dnsop-multiple-responses-03?

I've no idea (yet) - that didn't exist when I wrote it :p

Ray