On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Ray Bellis <r...@bellis.me.uk> wrote:
> > > On 25/03/2019 09:28, Ian Swett wrote: > > One way DoH may be faster than DoT in the near future is that DoH can go > > over HTTP/3 via QUIC and avoid head of line blocking like Do53. > > Head of line blocking shouldn't happen on a modern Do53 server. > > See RFC 7766 ยง6.2.1.1 > > I've seen this confusion before, so I can clear it up! Ray is (I believe) referring to the flexible re-ordering of DNS request-reply pairs of a TCP channel.. similar to HTTP/2 (though with less flexibility in granularity iirc). That addresses hol-blocking problems due to the time the server spends building replies. Ian is (I believe) referring to head of line blocking problems related to TCP's in-order delivery semantic and packet loss. TCP packet loss will delay the delivery of received packets if there are outstanding unreceived lower-numbered packets. If the data in these packets are unrelated (e.g. different DNS request/reply pairs) - that causes head of line blocking to the application. That's true of http/2 and RFC7766 (anything tcp based really). QUIC streams provide a mechanism for identifying which sequences actually need to have that dependency. DoH with H3 would use separate streams for separate requests (as different HTTP exchanges are inherently on different streams). Its a shame that the term hol blocking is used for both scenarios - it has caused a lot of confusion. hth -Patrick
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
