Status Quo is good for ipv4 to ipv6 migration. Totally agree with william on PUSH/PULL.
1. Hotest internet service's RDATA always exists in recursive dns cache, PUSH is not speed up much except hit-miss. ( recursive -> authority ) 2. clients known what they want, PULL & prefething is Ockham's Razor. ( stub -> recursive ) Imagine that if someone visits serv-a.xxx.com and serv-b.xxx.com. If serv-a.xxx.com has the same associate PUSH RRDATA with serv-b.xxx.com, for example css.xxx.com, image.xxx.com, js.xxx.com, etc. Dumplicate response and increase the DDoS risk (abuse use). william manning <[email protected]>于2016年8月17日周三 下午6:59写道： > from an attacker POV, I would strongly support PUSH, as it would increase > DDoS effectiveness. The performance enhancement seems to be based on some > presumptions about servers retaining residual knowledge of the resolver > behaviours. > PULL minimizes the attack surface. wrt cache coherence and delay, I think > the resolver is closer to the APPs using the data and so may be in a batter > place to understand what is and will be needed. Those needs can be met > with prefetching/caching, which mitigate the RTT/delay issues. > Status Quo - if it was good enough for Phil Almquist, it's good enough for > me! :) > > /Wm > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 3:32 PM, George Michaelson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Tim Wicinski <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > All of these documents are attempting to solve a larger problem in >> different >> > ways. The end result is "Return Associated Answer" to the client. >> > >> > The question is starting to coalesce around these two premises: >> > >> > - Do we want to Server to PUSH any or all Associated Answers, or >> >> This option reduces effective RTT delay. It has the most performace >> improvement in DNS delay reduction, assuming the extra payload is >> determined to be needed eg flags, or heuristical analysis of client >> behaviour. >> >> Its cost is additional data on the server->client path. Personally, I >> think this is the best option and the one most likely to increase >> cache coherence, timeliness, and reduce delay in the DNS phase. >> >> > >> > - Do we want the Client to PULL any or all Associated Answers, or >> >> This minimizes traffic. Otherwise, it maximises delay if subsequent >> query is needed. I would suggest that a client option or flag to >> request this behaviour is plausible if PUSH is the norm. >> >> > >> > - Do we want the Status Quo? >> >> This seems the safest option and the most inherently boring, and >> pointless. Why are we here if we think the best bet is the status quo? >> Down down, deeper and down... >> >> -G >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> DNSOP mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >> > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > -- Best Regards Pan Lanlan +86 186 9834 2356
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
