Hi,
Let's take an issue separately from the rest. Me and Jinmei discussed
this, but were OK with as it is. However, if WG has clear opinions,
now might be time for modifying the text and/or recommiding changes to
the additional data processing.
As described by ipv6-dns-issues, section 4.4, there are two kinds of
additional data:
1. "critical" additional data; this must be included (all the
possible RRsets) in all scenarios, and
2. "courtesy" additional data; this could be sent in full, with only
a few RRsets, or with no RRsets, and can be fetched separately as
well, but which could lead to non-optimal results.
[[ see examples of each in the draft.]]
Imagine the event where the additional data section would include both
A and AAAA RRsets and would be too large, but omitting one RRset would
make it small enough.
Now, the questions are:
A) Is there consensus that it's better to set TC bit than to return
only some RRsets of critical additional data?
B) Is it better to omit all the courtesy addional data, rather than
omit some RRsets?
C) (This is relevant if you answered "no" to B) Is it better to set
TC bit rather than return only some RRsets with courtesy
additional data?
Opinions? Discussion? Etc.?
As for my personal preference:
A) probably yes (not sure).
B) yes, omit everything.
C) possibly yes, not sure. (Doesn't matter if "yes" to B)
--
Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
.
dnsop resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop/index.html
