On Friday, December 15, 2017 04:19:44 PM 左鹏 wrote: > thanks for your comment! > > > > -----原始邮件----- > > 发件人: "Robert Edmonds" <[email protected]> > > Or, put another way, we like existing resolver implementations just > > fine, we just wish there were a lot more resolver instances, and closer > > to clients :-) > > > > > yes, more resolvers are good to improve user experience. > but also maybe we should notice each CDN node has different capacity.(it is > the real in practice). a "weight-aware" rosolver can schedule clients to > diffent nodes according to weight pricisely.
load vs. capacity information varies too often to publish guidance about it in DNS. if a CDN can topolocate an HTTP initator, it can vary its answer according to load, far better than it can predict or estimate both load, capacity, and topolocation in a way expressible in the DNS. > or shall we do something only > for authoritative server like defining the weighted A/AAAAx? > btw, any comments on the weightd CNAMEXs for multi-CDN? :) we should do neither. the path you are recommending increases complexity by a greater order of magnitude than any possible or prospective resulting benefit. -- P. Vixie
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
