In article <9056955.dJ39pTEj9z@linux-9daj> you write:
>On Wednesday, 1 July 2020 09:41:49 UTC Jan Včelák wrote:
>> We just opened this discussion internally at NS1 because we serve some
>> zones with more than 10 NS records where each NS requires glue and our
>> proprietary server by design adds gl
> On 2 Jul 2020, at 11:18, John Levine wrote:
>
> In article <9056955.dJ39pTEj9z@linux-9daj> you write:
>> On Wednesday, 1 July 2020 09:41:49 UTC Jan Včelák wrote:
>>> We just opened this discussion internally at NS1 because we serve some
>>> zones with more than 10 NS records where each NS req
On Thursday, 2 July 2020 01:18:16 UTC John Levine wrote:
> In article <9056955.dJ39pTEj9z@linux-9daj> you write:
> >On Wednesday, 1 July 2020 09:41:49 UTC Jan Včelák wrote:
> >> ...
> >
> >i think if you're using round robin or random selection, a subset is fine.
> >if we had to codify this practic
On Thursday, 2 July 2020 07:47:36 UTC Paul Vixie wrote:
> On Thursday, 2 July 2020 01:18:16 UTC John Levine wrote:
> > ...
>
> this is the draft where that issue would be decided, so it's good we're
> talking about it. ...
by the way, this is what kato and i, and later jabley, were trying to get
On Thu, 2 Jul 2020, Paul Vixie wrote:
until someone invents faster than light travel, round trips and remote state
will be the second and third most expensive things on the internet. (the most
expensive thing is complexity.) i think we can usefully discuss whether to set
TC=1 if the only thing t
On Thursday, 2 July 2020 14:50:24 UTC John R Levine wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jul 2020, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > ... but our goal should be to allow smart initiators to avoid
> > retrying with TCP out of reflex. my recommendation of TC=0 is to suppress
> > reflexive TCP retries.
> I wouldn't disagree but it
On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 03:29:01PM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> On Thursday, 2 July 2020 14:50:24 UTC John R Levine wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Jul 2020, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > > ... but our goal should be to allow smart initiators to avoid
> > > retrying with TCP out of reflex. my recommendation of TC=0 is
On Thursday, 2 July 2020 14:50:24 UTC John R Levine wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jul 2020, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > ... but our goal should be to allow smart initiators to avoid
> > retrying with TCP out of reflex. my recommendation of TC=0 is to suppress
> > reflexive TCP retries.
> I wouldn't disagree but it
>> this is the draft where that issue would be decided, so it's
>> good we're talking about it. ...
>
> by the way, this is what kato and i, and later jabley, were
> trying to get at with
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-respsize/
>
> but it was like moving mud with a toothpick
On Jul 7, 2020, at 12:57, Havard Eidnes wrote:
>>> this is the draft where that issue would be decided, so it's
>>> good we're talking about it. ...
>>
>> by the way, this is what kato and i, and later jabley, were
>> trying to get at with
>>
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-r
>>> by the way, this is what kato and i, and later jabley, were
>>> trying to get at with
>>>
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-respsize/
>>>
>>> but it was like moving mud with a toothpick, so after eleven
>>> years (2003 to 2014) we gave it up. there are probably some
>>> good
Joe Abley wrote on 2020-07-07 10:01:
On Jul 7, 2020, at 12:57, Havard Eidnes wrote:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-respsize/
but it was like moving mud with a toothpick, so after eleven
years (2003 to 2014) we gave it up. there are probably some
good ideas in there, eve
12 matches
Mail list logo
