It appears that Paul Wouters <[email protected]> said: >On Fri, 10 Nov 2023, John R Levine wrote: > >> Subject: [DNSOP] QNAME minimization is bad >> >> Well, not always bad but sometimes. > >A bit misleading subject :P
It seems to have done the trick. >> I'd like to write a draft that updates RFC 9156 by describing situations >> like >> this that caches could recognize and avoid useless churn, added to section >> 2.3 which already suggests special casing underscored labels. > >Couldn't the RBL's add an underscore in their base zone name to trigger >the special casing in 9156? That would not require a new RFC and >perhaps might not require code updates? DNSBLs have been around a lot longer than QNAME minimization. They work(ed) fine without minimization and I don't think it is reasonable to expect every mail system in the world to change their configuration to work around our performance bug. R's, John _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
