To clear up a few points.
On Oct 31, 2014, at 7:08, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 03:29:21PM -0400,
> Edward Lewis wrote
> a message of 526 lines which said:
>
>> This sounds like something related to work attempted in the DBound
>> mail list,
>
> Doug Barton suggested
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 05:02:21PM -0400,
Andrew Sullivan wrote
a message of 21 lines which said:
> Ed's point is not wrong, however -- in one fairly natural meaning, the
> technique is actually "query maximization". If one called it "query
> disclosure minimization" or something like that it
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 08:46:37PM +,
Darcy Kevin (FCA) wrote
a message of 19 lines which said:
> Isn't "doing the minimum necessary to get the job done" pretty much
> the definition of "optimization" (or, for that matter,
> "efficiency")? "Minimize" means, basically, only "to make small";
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 01:35:28PM -0700,
Paul Vixie wrote
a message of 7 lines which said:
> the term "query minimization" appeals to me since each server,
> during iteration, sees the minimum substring of the qname needed.
That's why it is "qname minimisation", not "query minimisation" :-)
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 07:42:02PM +,
Darcy Kevin (FCA) wrote
a message of 1087 lines which said:
> I too have been tempted to comment on the fact that there is no
> QNAME that is being "minimized" here (which would imply making it
> shorter; not the gist of the proposal at all).
I really
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 03:29:21PM -0400,
Edward Lewis wrote
a message of 526 lines which said:
> Should be DNSOP WG
Boilerplate from XML2RFC. I have to read the documentation.
> Because, as described this proposal would increase the number of
> queries sent in search of a name.
It's minimi
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 01:35:28PM -0700, Paul Vixie wrote:
> the term "query minimization" appeals to me since each server, during
> iteration, sees the minimum substring of the qname needed.
Ed's point is not wrong, however -- in one fairly natural meaning, the
technique is actually "query maxim
- Kevin
-Original Message-
From: Paul Vixie [mailto:p...@redbarn.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 4:35 PM
To: Darcy Kevin (FCA)
Cc: dnsop
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation-00.txt
the term "query minimization" appeals
the term "query minimization" appeals to me since each server, during
iteration, sees the minimum substring of the qname needed.
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Some form of "optimization", perhaps?
I too have been tempted to comment on the fact that there is no QNAME that is
being "minimized" here (which would imply making it shorter; not the gist of
the proposal at all).
If we're stuck on the term "minimization", make it clear that it's not the
QNAM
10 matches
Mail list logo
