On 5/12/15 9:52 AM, Rick Jones wrote:
On 05/12/2015 03:00 AM, Ralf Weber wrote:I am not saying that we should not do DNS over TCP. It's in the RFCs. But there is a cost on doing traffic over TCP compared to UDP and that is the case even if we only consider normal and not DDOS traffic. I'm not sure if TCPs role will get significantly bigger over time, given that people who operate large chunks of DNS seem to be very careful about avoiding it and so far EDNS has done a good job for us.To what extent does the broadening availability of TCP Fast Open affect the cost of TCP versus UDP calculus?
Yes, that's similar to what I was going to reply to Ralf, more generally if TCP performance were better for DNS (i.e., it's less of a "cost" to the system) does the inevitable fallback to TCP for real DNS traffic become more palatable for you?
It's fine to say "EDNS will solve this," but 15 years later it hasn't yet. :)
Doug --I am conducting an experiment in the efficacy of PGP/MIME signatures. This message should be signed. If it is not, or the signature does not validate, please let me know how you received this message (direct, or to a list) and the mail software you use. Thanks!
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ dns-operations mailing list [email protected] https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations dns-jobs mailing list https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-jobs
