Re: Something better than DNS?

[David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org>]

Karl,

On Nov 28, 2006, at 12:05 PM, Karl Auerbach wrote:
> There is an ancillary issues that have not, to my knowledge, been  
> adequately researched, and that is the expansion in the size of the  
> response packets.

I suppose that depends on your definition of "adequately".

> This will by itself make response packets larger.

Yes, the future definitely has larger response packets in store for us.

> How much longer probably isn't a big issue unless they are big  
> enough to trigger a fallback onto TCP rather than UDP or if we get  
> UDP packets that exceed path MTU and have to be fragmented.

The issue of response size comes up in a bunch of places (IDNs,  
adding AAAA, DNSSEC, etc.) and the implications of that growth is  
definitely an area of concern.  Given the indeterminate number of  
broken DNS implementations out there, any change (even one as  
innocuous (from a DNS protocol technical perspective) as adding IDNs)  
is almost guaranteed to break something.  The big question in my mind  
is how much will break and who will be affected.

> (By-the-way, why is EDNS/RFC 2671 not advancing on the standards  
> track?)

Good question.

Rgds,
-drc


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf