On Mon, 25 Mar 2019 at 16:05, Tony Finch <d...@dotat.at> wrote: > Ted Lemon <mel...@fugue.com> wrote: > > > This is equally an argument for doing DNS over DTLS. This would give > > similar performance to DoH over QUIC. > > If I understand it correctly, DTLS leaves MTU and fragmentation up to the > application protocol. The DNS has horrible packet size problems, so it > needs a lot more help than DTLS provides. QUIC is much better. >
We had a proposal in our draft https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dprive-dnsodtls-02#section-9 to handle fragmentation and reassembly but due to lack of support, it was removed in the next revision. If there is renewed interest in DNS-over-DTLS, we can submit a new draft discussing the fragmentation and reassembly procedure. Cheers, -Tiru > Tony. > -- > f.anthony.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ > The Minch: Westerly 4 or 5, backing southwesterly 5 or 6, occasionally 7 > later > in north. Rough in far north and in far south, otherwise slight or > moderate. > Occasional drizzle. Good, occasionally poor. > > _______________________________________________ > Doh mailing list > d...@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/doh >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
