On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:05 AM, Ralf Weber <d...@fl1ger.de> wrote: > Moin! > > On 16 Aug 2017, at 2:44, Warren Kumari wrote: >>> If it's a commonly-used name, I suspect the more straightforward >>> "prefetching" should suffice in practice: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wkumari-dnsop-hammer/ >>> Several popular recursive servers already implement the feature. >>> Some of them even enable it by default. >>> >> >> One of the main outstanding items on the "Stop! Hammer Time!" document >> that we need to clean up the implementation section (Appendix A), but >> it does note that at least Unbound (NLNet Labs), OpenDNS, and ISC BIND >> 9.10 implement this. > From how I read the document and understand the implementations none of > those implements the actual draft, but instead they have implementations > that do some sort of prefetching. If that is the case you can add Nominum > Cacheserve to the list,
Awesome! > but I really think we should do some more general > document describing prefetching as a concept and not just one way how to > do it with a hammer ;-). Yeah, we keep meaning to go back and fix up the document. I think that it (and, even more so, the discussions) has already served it's primary purpose - it led to this being implemented. But, I think that it would be good if we now update it to explain what is now implemented, and how... I must admit that I some of my hesitance has been because I'm still entertained by the "joke", and know that I need to just get over this :-) W > > So long > -Ralf -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
