Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-wouters-edns-tcp-keepalive-00.txt (fwd)
Tony Finch <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.dnsext |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Dave Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote: > Paul Wouters writes: > > But unless I hear more people who would favour making the new option > > more "optional" I think we should stick to this more clear cut of > > the undefined past behaviour. > > Just for the record, to balance out any comments for changing course, > I support this approach. I am worried that this will make edns-tcp-keepalive clients perform unnecessarily badly when talking to RFC 5966 servers, so developers are going to have to add a configuration switch to make the client do persistent TCP even in the absence of edns-tcp-keepalive. This is ugly: it should be handled automatically by the protocol not by system integrators debugging performance problems. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <[email protected]> http://dotat.at/ Forties, Cromarty: East, veering southeast, 4 or 5, occasionally 6 at first. Rough, becoming slight or moderate. Showers, rain at first. Moderate or good, occasionally poor at first. _______________________________________________ dnsext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext