Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7816bis-10: (with DISCUSS)
Works for me too. My main observation was to consider acknowledging there might be some nuance in this QTYPE area, and this sounds sufficiently nuance-y for me. Thanks Paul! On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 10:36 PM Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote: > Paul, > > First , thank you for your reply. > > Second, your proposed change actually addresses my DISCUSS and will be > happy to change my ballot in a NO OBJECTION once a revised I-D is published > ;-) > > Regards > > -éric > > -Original Message- > From: iesg on behalf of Paul Hoffman < > paul.hoff...@icann.org> > Date: Wednesday, 25 August 2021 at 00:44 > To: Eric Vyncke > Cc: dnsop , The IESG , " > draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7816...@ietf.org" < > draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7816...@ietf.org> > Subject: Re: [Ext] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on > draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7816bis-10: (with DISCUSS) > > On Aug 24, 2021, at 5:23 AM, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker < > nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > > == DISCUSS == > > > > -- Section 2.1 -- > > I support Erik Kline's COMMENT on this and am raising it to a > blocking DISCUSS. > > > > A/ in all the discussion in the last §, a would have the same > benefit when > > compared to a NS QTYPE. Or what did I miss ? > > > > B/ the last two sentences "Another potential benefit...happy > eyeballs query for > > the A QTYPE." are puzzling as using A QTYPE will actually only cache > the A > > answer for the minimized request and more and more Internet users > are using > > IPv6 nowadays (and possibly even more recursive DNS servers). > > > > Hence, I would welcome some discussion in the last § about the > benefit of using > > A QTYPE rather than QTYPE and, as suggested by Erik Kline, > please remove > > the last 2 sentences. > > If we change from: > >A good candidate is to always use the "A" >QTYPE because this is the least likely to raise issues in DNS >software and middleboxes that do not properly support all QTYPEs. >The QTYPE=A queries will also blend into traffic from non-minimising >resolvers, making it in some cases harder to observe that the >resolver is using QNAME minimisation. Using the QTYPE that occurs >most in incoming queries will slightly reduce the number of queries, >as there is no extra check needed for delegations on non-apex >records. Another potential benefit of using QTYPE=A is that >[RFC8305] clients that need answers for both the A and types >will send the query first. When minimising using QTYPE=A the >minimised query might be useful, and now already in the cache, for >the happy eyeballs query for the A QTYPE. > > to: > >Good candidatesare to always use the "A" or "" >QTYPE because these is the least likely to raise issues in DNS >software and middleboxes that do not properly support all QTYPEs. >QTYPE=A or QTYPE= queries will also blend into traffic from > non-minimising >resolvers, making it in some cases harder to observe that the >resolver is using QNAME minimisation. Using a QTYPE that occurs >most in incoming queries will slightly reduce the number of queries, >as there is no extra check needed for delegations on non-apex >records. > > does that alleviate your concers? > > --Paul Hoffman > > ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7816bis-10: (with DISCUSS)
Paul, First , thank you for your reply. Second, your proposed change actually addresses my DISCUSS and will be happy to change my ballot in a NO OBJECTION once a revised I-D is published ;-) Regards -éric -Original Message- From: iesg on behalf of Paul Hoffman Date: Wednesday, 25 August 2021 at 00:44 To: Eric Vyncke Cc: dnsop , The IESG , "draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7816...@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ext] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7816bis-10: (with DISCUSS) On Aug 24, 2021, at 5:23 AM, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker wrote: > == DISCUSS == > > -- Section 2.1 -- > I support Erik Kline's COMMENT on this and am raising it to a blocking DISCUSS. > > A/ in all the discussion in the last §, a would have the same benefit when > compared to a NS QTYPE. Or what did I miss ? > > B/ the last two sentences "Another potential benefit...happy eyeballs query for > the A QTYPE." are puzzling as using A QTYPE will actually only cache the A > answer for the minimized request and more and more Internet users are using > IPv6 nowadays (and possibly even more recursive DNS servers). > > Hence, I would welcome some discussion in the last § about the benefit of using > A QTYPE rather than QTYPE and, as suggested by Erik Kline, please remove > the last 2 sentences. If we change from: A good candidate is to always use the "A" QTYPE because this is the least likely to raise issues in DNS software and middleboxes that do not properly support all QTYPEs. The QTYPE=A queries will also blend into traffic from non-minimising resolvers, making it in some cases harder to observe that the resolver is using QNAME minimisation. Using the QTYPE that occurs most in incoming queries will slightly reduce the number of queries, as there is no extra check needed for delegations on non-apex records. Another potential benefit of using QTYPE=A is that [RFC8305] clients that need answers for both the A and types will send the query first. When minimising using QTYPE=A the minimised query might be useful, and now already in the cache, for the happy eyeballs query for the A QTYPE. to: Good candidatesare to always use the "A" or "" QTYPE because these is the least likely to raise issues in DNS software and middleboxes that do not properly support all QTYPEs. QTYPE=A or QTYPE= queries will also blend into traffic from non-minimising resolvers, making it in some cases harder to observe that the resolver is using QNAME minimisation. Using a QTYPE that occurs most in incoming queries will slightly reduce the number of queries, as there is no extra check needed for delegations on non-apex records. does that alleviate your concers? --Paul Hoffman ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7816bis-10: (with DISCUSS)
On Aug 24, 2021, at 5:23 AM, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker wrote: > == DISCUSS == > > -- Section 2.1 -- > I support Erik Kline's COMMENT on this and am raising it to a blocking > DISCUSS. > > A/ in all the discussion in the last §, a would have the same benefit > when > compared to a NS QTYPE. Or what did I miss ? > > B/ the last two sentences "Another potential benefit...happy eyeballs query > for > the A QTYPE." are puzzling as using A QTYPE will actually only cache the A > answer for the minimized request and more and more Internet users are using > IPv6 nowadays (and possibly even more recursive DNS servers). > > Hence, I would welcome some discussion in the last § about the benefit of > using > A QTYPE rather than QTYPE and, as suggested by Erik Kline, please remove > the last 2 sentences. If we change from: A good candidate is to always use the "A" QTYPE because this is the least likely to raise issues in DNS software and middleboxes that do not properly support all QTYPEs. The QTYPE=A queries will also blend into traffic from non-minimising resolvers, making it in some cases harder to observe that the resolver is using QNAME minimisation. Using the QTYPE that occurs most in incoming queries will slightly reduce the number of queries, as there is no extra check needed for delegations on non-apex records. Another potential benefit of using QTYPE=A is that [RFC8305] clients that need answers for both the A and types will send the query first. When minimising using QTYPE=A the minimised query might be useful, and now already in the cache, for the happy eyeballs query for the A QTYPE. to: Good candidatesare to always use the "A" or "" QTYPE because these is the least likely to raise issues in DNS software and middleboxes that do not properly support all QTYPEs. QTYPE=A or QTYPE= queries will also blend into traffic from non-minimising resolvers, making it in some cases harder to observe that the resolver is using QNAME minimisation. Using a QTYPE that occurs most in incoming queries will slightly reduce the number of queries, as there is no extra check needed for delegations on non-apex records. does that alleviate your concers? --Paul Hoffman smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
