Phillip Hallam-Baker <i...@hallambaker.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 5:04 AM, Tony Finch <d...@dotat.at> wrote: > > Phillip Hallam-Baker <i...@hallambaker.com> wrote: > >> > >> Having it work for content and DNS are two different things. The > >> routing tables only need to be constant for a few minutes to support > >> TCP content download. For DNS to be viable they have to be stable much > >> longer. > > > > Why? > > The byterange extensions in http mean that it is possible to resume a > session interrupted part way through if it is static content.
Most HTTP interactions aren't resumable in this way, so this observation does not suggest to me that HTTP needs less routing stability than DNS. > If the anycast changes then you are going to have to timeout and resume. This is also true for HTTP. I still don't see why DNS needs more routing stability than HTTP. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ Rockall, Malin, Hebrides, Bailey: West or northwest, becoming cyclonic 5 to 7, occasionally gale 8, except in Hebrides. Rough or very rough, occasionally high at first in Bailey. Rain or showers. Good, occasionally moderate. _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list dns-privacy@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
