Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] QNAME minimization is bad

2023-11-11 Thread David Conrad
Paul, On Nov 10, 2023, at 11:06 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote: >> On Nov 10, 2023, at 11:55 AM, John Levine wrote: >>> DNSBLs have been around a lot longer than QNAME minimization. >> Not sure that’s relevant — I presume you’re not suggesting DNSBLs are a >> predominant use of the DNS. > DNSBLs are on

Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] QNAME minimization is bad

2023-11-10 Thread Paul Hoffman
On Nov 10, 2023, at 21:41, David Conrad wrote: > > John, > > On Nov 10, 2023, at 11:55 AM, John Levine wrote: >> DNSBLs have been around a lot longer than QNAME minimization. > > Not sure that’s relevant — I presume you’re not suggesting DNSBLs are a > predominant use of the DNS. DNSBLs are

Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] QNAME minimization is bad

2023-11-10 Thread Paul Hoffman
On Nov 10, 2023, at 14:23, Paul Wouters wrote: > >> I'd like to write a draft that updates RFC 9156 by describing situations >> like this that caches could recognize and avoid useless churn, added to >> section 2.3 which already suggests special casing underscored labels. > > Couldn't the RBL'