i think there's a necessary and healthy tension between the installed base and new technology. i would not like to see every new application designed to run inside TCP/80, even though that's the only universal wide area protocol. and we won't see any new application that requires a forklift upgrade of the whole internet before it can be used -- no market.
in this case i think mark's approach is right, because it works better for people who fix their firewalls, but it finds a way to work, no matter what. this puts a little bit of pressure on middlebox makers who mindlessly constrain future protocols. sardonically, the reason i chose fragmentation for EDNS rather than a new MD (More Data) bit in the flags and a new "fragment number N of M" option in the OPT RR, is that i imagined getting EDNS deployed in less than five years. now that it's been almost fifteen years and we're still fiddling with it, i can see that i made the wrong choice in RFC 2671. vixie _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
