On 12/16/15 11:36 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:
this is the new era of "anything goes" for DNS protocol development. as
with client subnet, no matter how bad an idea is, if someone is already
doing it, then the ietf documents that use.
Paul,
The idea is to document deviations to the DNS protocol
On Thursday, December 17, 2015 08:20:24 PM Mark Delany wrote:
> It might be obvious to most, but should there be a section on
> out-of-order processing of requests?
>
> That the request pipeline order doesn't necesarily match the response
> pipeline order is particularly unexpected in some protoco
It might be obvious to most, but should there be a section on
out-of-order processing of requests?
That the request pipeline order doesn't necesarily match the response
pipeline order is particularly unexpected in some protocols (and
likely non-compliant), such as HTTP < 2.0
Mark.
_
Robert,
At 2015-12-16 21:08:03 -0500
Robert Edmonds wrote:
> Shane Kerr wrote:
> > I have updated the DNS over HTTP review document that I sent some days
> > ago. Thanks to Jinmei for reading it.
> >
> > As I mentioned before, if there is interest then my co-authors and I
> > are happy to try t
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations Working Group
of the IETF.
Title : DNS Transport over TCP - Implementation Requirements
Authors : John Dickinson
On 12/17/15 5:15 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:35:19PM -0800,
Barry Leiba wrote
a message of 125 lines which said:
I found the document to be a difficult read because of the
language. [...] We do better when we avoid this kind of invective in
our standards spe
Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation-08: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:35:19PM -0800,
Barry Leiba wrote
a message of 125 lines which said:
> I found the document to be a difficult read because of the
> language. [...] We do better when we avoid this kind of invective in
> our standards specs, [...] We really shouldn't write standards th
