Adopt it. Then argue about it.
I think it is worthwhile to talk about. IMHO it isn’t a protocol change, but a change to how a recursive element looks for an answer in the existing protocol. On Oct 20, 2014, at 17:30, Paul Vixie <[email protected]> wrote: > there's a cart/horse proble in this thread. > > right now we're arguing whether to adopt it. > > if we adopt it then its goods and bads will become relevant. > > that said: > >> Bob Harold Monday, October 20, 2014 2:03 PM >> I support the idea of qname minimization, but I think there is a common case >> where it will cause additional DNS round trips, slowing the response and >> increasing the number of packets and queries the servers must handle. > > i argue that caching will equalize these logic paths over a very short > stretch of wall time. > > -- > Paul Vixie > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
