On 06/11/2018 00:36, Paul Vixie wrote:
second reply, on a more general topic:
the "HTTP URI" will require a change to bert's teaching resolver (tres),
which correctly handles unrecognized code points and thus would need no
changes at all if the additional data weren't mandatory. i think in
modern terminology, if your proposed addition to the DNS protocol
requires a change to "tres", it's (a) not "cheap", and (b) part of "the
camel". we are adding state, logic, and signal. (ouch.)
The additional data is not mandatory.
more broadly: most ideas are bad, including mine, and especially when
DNS is the subject area. self-deception about how cheap they will be
looks wretched on us. let's not be that. if a change is to be made, let
it be because there is _no_ existing way within the standard to
accomplish some vital task. SRV's lack of wildcard support is adequate
cause. two RTT's on a cache miss is not. apparent cheapness is not.
Ack, except on that very last point (see previous message) where I think
we need to consider the relative cost-benefit-analysis of the alternatives.
Ray
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
