Jared Mauch wrote: > IOn Mar 27, 2017, at 5:59 PM, P Vix <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I agree to review and comment. Note that I am provisionally negative to the > > idea itself, and my review may reflect that. Vixie > > > I will note there are other implementations out there as well, such as in > unbound. serve-expired configuration directive is available there as well.
Though, the algorithm described in this document is a much different algorithm than the one in Unbound. If I understand Unbound's serve-expired algorithm correctly, it always serves from cache if available (regardless of expiration status), and if what it served to the client happened to be expired, it triggers a post-response fetch to update the cache asynchronously. That can end up serving a lot more stale bread than is strictly necessary if your Unbound server only serves a few clients. (I guess Unbound could sort of be said to implement this draft, but with the client response timer hardcoded to 0 and the maximum stale timer hardcoded to ∞.) I support adoption of this document. -- Robert Edmonds _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
