Hi all, I'm seeing increasing discussion about edns-client-subnet (most recently documented, I think, in the expired document draft-vandergaast-edns-client-subnet-02), both in commercial and open source venues (there's an active thread on the unbound-users mailing list right now, for example).
Google DNS supports edns-client-subnet, which by recent GIH+GGM count means 10%+ of all client queries now trigger queries to authority servers with that option included. On the authority side, support for this option has a potential impact on query load. On the recursive side, support for this option has a potential impact on cache size. With multiple implementations, there are interop issues. If I recall the history of draft-vandergaast-edns-client-subnet-02, it stalled because various persuasive people in IETF working groups reacted to the vomity taste it left in their mouths (by which I refer to the concept, not the quality of the documentation). I may well have been one of them. However, I now feel that regardless of any vomity taste, what we are looking at is a proposal that has been implemented in multiple code bases (and hence must interoperate), has seen significant deployment and the use of which has operational consequences. Both the protocol changes and the impact on operations should be documented. I think dnsop should pick up some or all of this work. I think not picking up this work will result in implementation and operational problems. (I am reminded of the consequences of not standardising NAT, for example.) I would be happy to contribute reviews and/or text. Thoughts? Joe _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
