[DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2018-11-04 Thread Ralf Weber
Moin! As the mic line was closed after Mark, and I didn’t have anything new to say meaning I support the draft but don’t like the EDNS options before Mark spoke I use email to comment on Marks comments. We already have a mechanism where the Authority tells the resolver how long to cache

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-29 Thread Shumon Huque
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Paul Vixie wrote: > > > Shumon Huque wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Paul Vixie > ... > > > > speaking of resimprove, i hope you'll include in this draft the idea > of > > using delegation-TTL as a

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-29 Thread Paul Vixie
Shumon Huque wrote: > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Paul Vixie ... > > speaking of resimprove, i hope you'll include in this draft the idea of > using delegation-TTL as a delegation-recheck interval, and using an > authoritative NXDOMAIN from the

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-28 Thread Shumon Huque
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Paul Vixie wrote: > > since it allocates no code point and the method requires no interop, > this draft feels a bit like resimprove, which died on the vine for no > reason i can now recall. it's harmless as an FYI, but does not belong on > the

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-28 Thread Dave Lawrence
Paul Vixie writes: > speaking of resimprove, i hope you'll include in this draft the idea of > using delegation-TTL as a delegation-recheck interval, and using an > authoritative NXDOMAIN from the delegator as proof that you need to run > an "rm -rf" in your cache. I definitely like the latter

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-28 Thread Paul Vixie
Warren Kumari wrote: > ... I think > that the actual algorithm specified is a secondary consideration -- > first we need to agree on if the concept / idea is good for general > use. that will depend on the algorithm. for example if it's only stretchy for timeouts and servfail, but nxdomain is

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-28 Thread Peter van Dijk
Hello Shumon, On 28 Mar 2017, at 14:08, Shumon Huque wrote: OpenDNS also has had a similar feature (exact protocol unpublished AFAICT) for a while now (Smartcache, ~ 2009 I think). There is some background at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt9VUPDoZk0 starting at 14:33. Slides at

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-28 Thread Warren Kumari
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 6:20 AM, Pieter Lexis wrote: > On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:19:09 -0400 > Jared Mauch wrote: > >> I will note there are other implementations out there as well, such as in >> unbound. serve-expired configuration directive is

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-28 Thread Dave Lawrence
Pieter Lexis writes: > I feel that the authors should attempt to describe the goal of the > algorithm and suggest possible limits and describe pitfalls rather > than describing the exact algorithm to use. I confess I'm a bit flummoxed by this comment, as I believe the document already does

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-28 Thread Shumon Huque
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Jared Mauch wrote: > IOn Mar 27, 2017, at 5:59 PM, P Vix 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

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-28 Thread Pieter Lexis
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:19:09 -0400 Jared Mauch wrote: > I will note there are other implementations out there as well, such as in > unbound. serve-expired configuration directive is available there as well. I feel that the authors should attempt to describe the goal of

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-27 Thread Jared Mauch
> On Mar 27, 2017, at 6:46 PM, Robert Edmonds wrote: > > Jared Mauch wrote: >> IOn Mar 27, 2017, at 5:59 PM, P Vix wrote: >>> >>> I agree to review and comment. Note that I am provisionally negative to the >>> idea itself, and my review may reflect that.

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-27 Thread Jared Mauch
> On Mar 27, 2017, at 5:56 PM, Dave Lawrence wrote: > > Warren and I are hoping for WG adoption. [clarification] I support adoption when the chairs request it. - Jared ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-27 Thread Robert Edmonds
Jared Mauch wrote: > IOn Mar 27, 2017, at 5:59 PM, P Vix 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,

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-27 Thread Jared Mauch
IOn Mar 27, 2017, at 5:59 PM, P Vix 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

Re: [DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-27 Thread P Vix
I agree to review and comment. Note that I am provisionally negative to the idea itself, and my review may reflect that. Vixie On March 27, 2017 4:56:58 PM CDT, Dave Lawrence wrote: >One of the two drafts I wanted to talk about at dnsop today for WG >adoption was "Serving Stale

[DNSOP] draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

2017-03-27 Thread Dave Lawrence
One of the two drafts I wanted to talk about at dnsop today for WG adoption was "Serving Stale Data to Improve DNS Resiliency": https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale/ In short, this describes a method for increasing DNS resiliency by treating the inability to refresh data