Re: [DNSOP] Comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation

At Sun, 04 Jan 2015 14:15:17 -0800, Paul Vixie wrote: > > also noting, dotless domains exist. dotless hostnames (for mail, web, > etc) by def'n do not. I don't understand. Such a definition seems to be cheerfully violated in the case of http://dk/ Best regards, Niall O'Reilly _

Re: [DNSOP] Some notes and nits on draft-ietf-dnsop-resolver-priming

Warren Kumari wrote: > > Below are some comment, in OPR/C format. Is that [O] original text [P] proposed replacement [R] reasoning? [C] comment? Not sure what R and C mean. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finchhttp://dotat.at/ Dover, Wight, Portland, Plymouth: South 5 or 6, veering southwest 6 to gale

Re: [DNSOP] Comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation

In message , "Niall O'Reilly" writes: > At Sun, 04 Jan 2015 14:15:17 -0800, > Paul Vixie wrote: > > > > also noting, dotless domains exist. dotless hostnames (for mail, web, > > etc) by def'n do not. > > I don't understand. > > Such a definition seems to be cheerfully violated in the case

Re: [DNSOP] Comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation

At Thu, 08 Jan 2015 23:23:36 +1100, Mark Andrews wrote: > > It is after 15 Jul 85. "dk" is no longer a hostname. There is > just a node in the DNS tree with a A record attached which has no > defined meaning. > > Mark Thanks, Mark. RFC 1034 (November 1987, but I'm sure you know that) uses

Re: [DNSOP] Some notes and nits on draft-ietf-dnsop-resolver-priming

yup. Original Proposed Reason or Remark or Comment (comment is probably best (covers all case)), but then the acronym is OPC. I'm looking for a nicer / more pronounceable name or acronym... W On Thursday, January 8, 2015, Tony Finch wrote: > Warren Kumari > wrote: > > > > Below are some comm

Re: [DNSOP] Comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation

> Niall O'Reilly > Thursday, January 08, 2015 2:39 AM > At Sun, 04 Jan 2015 14:15:17 -0800, > > I don't understand. > > Such a definition seems to be cheerfully violated in the case of > http://dk/ yup. and true to my words, that url will work in some places, and no

Re: [DNSOP] comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet-00

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/31/2014 08:31 PM, 神明達哉 wrote: > - Section 6.3 > > If the address of the client is within any of the networks in the > cache, then the cached response MUST be returned as usual. If the > address of the client matches multiple networks in the c

[DNSOP] Hostname (was: Comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation)

Thanks, Paul. At Thu, 08 Jan 2015 06:06:10 -0800, Paul Vixie wrote: > > yup. and true to my words, that url will work in some places, and not > in others. as a local-seeming name it will often be tried with search > lists first, which might find a dk.vix.com or whatever locally, and it > will o

[DNSOP] About DNS over TCP query pipelining

I am working on the different aspects of the query pipeling (for DNS over TCP or any stream / sequenced packet transport). I try a new tool which sends multiple queries to check which authoritative nameserver implementations support out-of-order responses with a funny result! I never got a conclusi

Re: [DNSOP] About DNS over TCP query pipelining

Francis Dupont wrote: > I try a new tool which sends multiple queries to check which > authoritative nameserver implementations support out-of-order responses > with a funny result! You can use adns to do this test too, e.g. with the --tcp query option to adnshost. (Caveat: adnshost does not hav

Re: [DNSOP] comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet-00

At Thu, 08 Jan 2015 15:52:12 +0100, Yuri Schaeffer wrote: > > If I understand this (and Section 6.3 in general), the following > > "suboptimal" scenario could happen: - The Authoritative Server is > > configured with two prefixes for optimized responses: 2001:db8::/32 > > and 2001:db8:2::/48 - Th

Re: [DNSOP] comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet-00

Hello everyone, Only just spotted this thread after a coworker pointed me at it. I won't be able to follow up to everything, but will try to address some of the questions. Re NETMASK: Yeah, sorry, poor choice of terminology early on in the doc. Prefix length is the right term to use, it just felt

Re: [DNSOP] comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet-00

On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 10:58 AM, wrote: > - Using my server side configuration example of 2001:db8::/32 and > 2001:db8:2::/48 again. With this definition of SCOPE and caching > behavior at the Recursive Server, the Recursive Server would have > to cache separate responses for all of the 64

Re: [DNSOP] "Optimization" in draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation

On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 08:33:31AM -0800, Paul Hoffman wrote a message of 27 lines which said: > I have always heard that sending the full name was an optimization > for authoritative severs I will check with the Highest Authorities. In the mean time, I changed the draft to add there were re

Re: [DNSOP] "Optimization" in draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation

On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 07:19:31AM -0800, Paul Vixie wrote a message of 137 lines which said: > that's true in an empty cache. but that emptiness will be short lived. > at stead state, query-minimization has no more queries than > longest-match. And this point is already mentioned in the draf

Re: [DNSOP] Fwd: Comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation

On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 10:49:04AM -0500, Shumon Huque wrote a message of 113 lines which said: > Here's one example I'm familiar with (the website of my previous employer, > U of Penn, which uses the Akamai CDN): > > $ ./test.py www.upenn.edu Version -01 of the draft (expected this week-end

Re: [DNSOP] Comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation

In message , "Niall O'Reilly" writes: > At Thu, 08 Jan 2015 23:23:36 +1100, > Mark Andrews wrote: > > > > It is after 15 Jul 85. "dk" is no longer a hostname. There is > > just a node in the DNS tree with a A record attached which has no > > defined meaning. > > > > Mark > > Thanks, Mark. >