Re: [Doh] [Ext] a tad confused on response sizes

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Tue, 05 June 2018 14:50 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
X-Original-To: doh@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: doh@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEA171310C1 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 07:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=UqE7Q5fZ; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=FgftagYL
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 b2KTl3NHH4E7 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 07:50:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.yitter.info (mx4.yitter.info [159.203.56.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 071031310BC for <doh@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 07:50:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71A6CBDEF9 for <doh@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 14:50:31 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1528210231; bh=CI1Q4PzJt3YMs7LFjG7Ml5gMFtZ9eOUq5EuUpAUpqlY=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=UqE7Q5fZyL+gvatEqiaG/LMGJHEIjHkciwuhFm0yFXZRXj8qjSHpP+AEURhcryoPZ 8+nbCNFalj/+rNujTq0llBY+va2FID4Gl5cqwr4ldo/4RJZNqed1b/obnEr8PqHAw7 HNcl+yhW6U7BbTJBBgtylQRpLZQaxV2S4nvz+osw=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca
Received: from mx4.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx4.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CrI8CO10dj05 for <doh@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 14:50:30 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 10:50:29 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1528210230; bh=CI1Q4PzJt3YMs7LFjG7Ml5gMFtZ9eOUq5EuUpAUpqlY=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=FgftagYLqnmUOwRkfnKROBnErB9MBi1awBzaPdmMiIZyYI5FQvTql/ySuqapwO+Rr 7f7KMQfXc0xnpuQTtphW4TyNDd2dMMJRLDDM4fBzMuUorCqH4iddZJLC3hb3alshTI Oxar0wpZJRd6s7KazvULoPotbNAFBebZUyKM1c7o=
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: doh@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20180605145029.GI3011@mx4.yitter.info>
References: <20180605120510.GA29047@server.ds9a.nl> <CFEAAD6E-4F9D-4DB5-A362-21775D74F84A@icann.org> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1806051515510.1809@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <663E7B21-9107-4A2B-9DEB-E13475A4E5FF@icann.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <663E7B21-9107-4A2B-9DEB-E13475A4E5FF@icann.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/doh/lH_mRFM6AFWRXJtWSPmM2-OqZoE>
Subject: Re: [Doh] [Ext] a tad confused on response sizes
X-BeenThere: doh@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Over HTTPS <doh.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/doh>, <mailto:doh-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/doh/>
List-Post: <mailto:doh@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:doh-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/doh>, <mailto:doh-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 14:50:34 -0000

On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 02:48:30PM +0000, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> In both cases, the TC bit means "here's the best I got". 'Twas always thus.

Except that in DNS there's a clearly defined path for what to do next,
whereas I am equally mystified what a DNS API client is supposed to do
if it receives such a bit.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com