Re: New Version Notification for draft-wouters-edns-tcp-keepalive-00.txt (fwd)
Ray Bellis <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.dnsext |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <53F00E5CD8B2E34C81C0C89EB0B4FE732DED6639@wds-exc1.okna.nominet.org.uk> |
On 18 Oct 2013, at 15:21, Paul Wouters <[email protected]> wrote: > The question is how pervasive are rfc 5966 compliant resolvers out > there, and whether there is a need to advertise those who are. As the author of RFC 5966, I'm confused by your use of "5966 compliant". AFAICR (and assuming a server that already supports TCP) the only significant normative change in RFC 5966 was the recommendation to drop the idle timeout from two minutes down to being "of the order of seconds". Everything else was just clarification of stuff from previous RFCs that most people took as read, but wasn't necessarily written down as clearly as it might have been. Any enterprise grade DNS server that does already support TCP should handle multiple queries over the same socket without complaint. kind regards, Ray _______________________________________________ dnsext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext