[DNSOP] Re: Thoughts on handling large RRset sizes with PQC and other datasets

It appears that Wes Hardaker  <[email protected]> said:
>Philip Homburg <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Just a random idea: turn the protocol upside down

Down the hall in the DKIM WG we've been pondering PQC DKIM signatures and
running into a similar issue that the key records, which happen to be TXT
records, are going to get really big.  So that would be helpful for us, too.

>You and Ben suggested basically the same thing, which definitely is an
>option.  That does require hashing for every request on the server side,
>or keeping state of the hashes on the server side for performance
>reasons. 

Seems to be it depends on how many of these you get. If it's not a lot
you could just hash when you get a query that needs them. Or you could
make the camel sad with a kludge to cache the hashes for queries that
seem likely to benefit from them, based on some combination of
response size and query type.

R"s,
John

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]