To:
"D. J. Bernstein" <djb@cr.yp.to>
Cc:
dnsop@cafax.se
From:
Jim Reid <Jim.Reid@nominum.com>
Date:
Mon, 24 Feb 2003 02:15:56 -0800
In-Reply-To:
Message from "D. J. Bernstein" <djb@cr.yp.to> of "22 Feb 2003 18:21:43 GMT." <20030222182143.52496.qmail@cr.yp.to>
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: Why one port?
>>>>> "djb" == D J Bernstein <djb@cr.yp.to> writes:
>> You invited controversy by making a suggestion which would mean
>> changing every DNS server and client on the internet.
djb> Actually, deployment is much easier as follows:
djb> existing client
djb> -> client forwarding tool on 127.0.0.1 port 53
djb> -> cache forwarding tool on cache IP address on another port
djb> -> existing cache on port 53
djb> Both sides install new software, but there aren't any changes
djb> to the existing software.
I spoke of changes to *clients* and *servers*, not DNS software.
Your allegedly "easy" deployment scenario means changing every
client. It has to get new software, presumably which will need some
configuration file has to be looked after, and the existing resolver
setup has to be tweaked. And introducing this proxy agent you propose
creates more complexity and yet more ways of breaking things. This
doesn't seem all that easy, does it?
And what about folk like me who run a name server on their laptop and
want to continue to query that server over the loopback interface?
#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.