IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: moving forward on draft-lear-httpbis-svcinfo-rr

Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> Wed, 06 February 2013 00:36 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86D4321F893E for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 16:36:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.372
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.372 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.074, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id COqO-ips1lj1 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 16:36:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA17121F890D for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 16:36:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1U2szN-0005X8-CQ for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 00:35:49 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 00:35:49 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1U2szN-0005X8-CQ@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <grmocg@gmail.com>) id 1U2szH-0005Uw-7o for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 00:35:43 +0000
Received: from mail-la0-f51.google.com ([209.85.215.51]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <grmocg@gmail.com>) id 1U2szC-0006zP-UK for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 00:35:43 +0000
Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id fo13so802314lab.24 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 16:35:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=h1O/Yn+fpC8lGML45F2Nn30evTo7DgtccuIyh7A6Xxg=; b=v0wB4AyFWQ99ojcev8kOKBRzyvzhiXALF4ibrsKLlQ4Q4Bijf/0GdLlqvhpIZOngco O1n135iiBFTXjtN62uMjaGU/kEOEul868guvcpluvJBJlvt34dwpJ+JoQcwlkxO3bF5m EsUBkfE+GWsW2HoXcuLSI20EL1f22G1Z+VDcnVR80KV1zGQsDf6aTiTdOdnktvfOWkhd wc3BJKB9ZMOQzwphR9sG4D+xGvu1UOwXdobYFlBKF1ofs76+h0WwelZUWkhbzIXdb9eQ wEd3vGF2CKZJSKLEJG7ktmv/jfmD2YUMDKYUqD6d3ePB+6v0hyFgFA5A0nOg0f9NYzSX 7zuA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.147.202 with SMTP id tm10mr25086946lab.56.1360110911637; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 16:35:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.112.81.5 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 16:35:11 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <5111A4BA.8030205@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
References: <5110CB17.2000200@cisco.com> <CAP+FsNcapugpzHzuCkTmwV3C4fB=K0H3Svdoqwxqt8dNHocn8g@mail.gmail.com> <51117618.2060601@cisco.com> <CAA4WUYgeAQ981_egyVwCTZLqnXRd3kFM9D=R3Y9DyT9hwozONA@mail.gmail.com> <5111A4BA.8030205@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 16:35:11 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNeyeVXSMgFtumTiv3AsJrQB46s84f8c=HJZL_0xRBBzpQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Cc: "William Chan (陈智昌)" <willchan@chromium.org>, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="e89a8f235311be48b604d5037fc0"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.215.51; envelope-from=grmocg@gmail.com; helo=mail-la0-f51.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.518, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1U2szC-0006zP-UK 4ae71f5fe9c1e5fe64d8ddb30f1f7df2
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: moving forward on draft-lear-httpbis-svcinfo-rr
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAP+FsNeyeVXSMgFtumTiv3AsJrQB46s84f8c=HJZL_0xRBBzpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/16394
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

I think he means that whomever put the data in there could a time/date
beyond which that field was considered stale and shouldn't be interpreted
by clients.
This wouldn't be necessary if we could trust DNS down through to the client
to actually follow TTL, but.. fact is, we can't.

-=R


On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 4:32 PM, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>wrote:

> First, what others (e.g. Mark) said. Second, some details below.
>
>
> On 2013/02/06 6:27, William Chan (陈智昌) wrote:
>
>  If we stuff SETTINGS into the DNS record, we'd have to keep in mind
>> TTL. Either the record would need to include TTL info for the
>> SETTINGS, or it'd have to be coupled with the record's TTL, which I
>> think is probably undesirable.
>>
>
> I think you mean that you want the SETTINGs in the DNS record to have a
> shorter TTL than the record itself. But that couldn't possibly work. The
> browser would understand the SETTINGs and would poll DNS with an interval
> corresponding to the higher SETTINGs TTL, but DNS caches would only use the
> lower DNS record TTL and therefore wouldn't get updated.
>
> Regards,   Martin.
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email