wang.c...@zte.com.cn wrote: > Dear Suzanne & Tim, > > I have just submitted a new draft which tries to work out how to > synchronize the RRs information between resolvers and DNS servers. > The link is as follow and I would like to request a 5-min slot in > the upcoming f2f meeting. Would you please keep it in mind and try to > give me a chance to present it? > > ( > https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-huang-dnsop-synchronization-resolver-server-00.txt, > 5 minutes, Linda Wang) > > Thanks very much:) > > Best Regards, > Linda Wang
i have read this draft and i disagree with its problem statement as well as its proposed approach. cache invalidation cannot be centralized across tens of millions of recursive servers. it's too much state load and too much traffic for the authorities. ultradns, google, opendns, and others have a cooperative approach to cache invalidation which reportedly works fine for the large rdns operators. http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vixie-dnsext-resimprove/ (now expired) provides a scalable method of cache invalidation (has no state load and adds no traffic). draft-huang-dnsop-synchronization-resolver-server-00.txt is the wrong approach to the wrong problem. -- Paul Vixie _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
