[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


To: dnsop@cafax.se
From: "D. J. Bernstein" <djb@cr.yp.to>
Date: 17 Jul 2003 18:37:48 -0000
Automatic-Legal-Notices: See http://cr.yp.to/mailcopyright.html.
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject: Re: regarding the respsize draft: preferring glue of certain types

Randy Bush writes:
> i could v4 to root server, v4 to com server, v6 to foo.com server

Sure. However, if the foo.com server has _both_ v4 and v6 addresses,
then you could also reach it through v4. Furthermore, the .com server
knows this, because you reached the .com server through v4.

So why should the .com DNS server bother giving you _both_ v4 and v6
addresses for the foo.com DNS server? What exactly is the benefit that
outweighs the cost of building and sending larger packets?

Let me emphasize again that we're talking about DNS server addresses in
delegations, not about HTTP server addresses.

---D. J. Bernstein, Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics,
Statistics, and Computer Science, University of Illinois at Chicago
#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.

Home | Date list | Subject list