On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, Joe Abley wrote:
I hear that. I don't have a strong opinion about whether serving stale data in
general is desirable or abhorrent. However, the pragmatist in me says that
people are already implementing things like this anyway, and a standard
approach is better for all concerned than a fragmented set of
uncomfortably-different implementations, which will surely make troubleshooting
problems harder.
I also think if a standard specification can be obtained it ought to include
appropriate instrumentation to allow a response to indicate whether data is
stale or not. This seems to me just one example of a set of additional
components we might expect the working group to come up with, which in my mind
is a good reason to make it a working group document.
I support adoption with all of that in mind.
Agreed.
Paul
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
