Re: [DNSOP] Minimum viable ANAME

[神明達哉 <[e-mail]>]

At Fri, 21 Sep 2018 12:03:13 +0100,
Tony Finch <[e-mail]> wrote:

> > Perhaps primary server implementations may eventually have some level
> > of support that makes this provisioning much less painful (in a way
> > other than performing on-demand resolution).  If and when many popular
> > implementations do it in a convenient way (at least as convenient as
> > the proprietary alternatives), we may hope the new model with ANAME
> > optimization will start to deploy, eventually with wider deployment of
> > the optimization part as more resolvers support it.
>
> It doesn't have to be sequential like that: the additional section
> processing on auth and rec servers, and resolver ANAME optimization won't
> cause any interop problems, so they can be deployed whenever the code is
> ready and they'll have a useful effect when they encounter an ANAME
> record.

It's true that "they (= additional section processing) can be deployed
whenever the code is ready".  But if I were a primary side admin who
wants to use an ALIAS-like feature, that wouldn't mean much
unless/until
A. the provisioning support in the primary server implementation is
   really convenient in terms of my operational costs, or
B. a significantly large number of resolvers support the additional
   section processing for ANAME

In my understanding of the discussion we all agree that it will take a
very long time until we have B.  So, in the end, the deployability
seems to depend on how soon we can have situation A and how convenient
the implementations are.  It may actually come quite soon and may
really become very popular.  I don't deny that possibility; I'm just
not personally so optimistic about it.

--
JINMEI, Tatuya