On 03 Dec 2013, at 11:06, Tony Finch <d...@dotat.at> wrote: > Roy Arends <r...@dnss.ec> wrote: >> >> i.e. I never said that it doesn’t make sense to reduce validation >> latency. On the contrary. >> >> I also said that it makes sense to complete the delegation chain first, >> then complete the validation chain. > > But those two statements are a contradiction. The main opportunity to > reduce latency is by getting the two chains concurrently.
Both can be done concurrently. You’re right. I was wrong. I was worried (and the worry led to the confusion) that _if_ the delegation chain fails to complete, cycli are wasted by trying to validate this incomplete delegation chain (and I remember the redundant Rollover and Die traffic related to this exact issue). Hope this helps. Roy
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
