- From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 10:25:49 +0200 (MET DST)
- To: "David W. Morris" <dwm@shell.portal.com>
- Cc: koen@win.tue.nl, jg@w3.org, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
David W. Morris: > >It is my understanding that MUST and SHOULD are defined terms and >strongly encouraged is not as far as RFCs are concerned. Yes. `strongly encouraged' seems to be a HTTP invention. I don't see this as a real problem, but it you would rather see SHOULD, that is fine with me. > Thus, I >offer the following editorial alternative to Koen's suggestion (which >I endorse): > > If a client caches the result of a DNS lookups, it should observe the > TTL (Time To Live) reported by the DNS server. If the TTL value is > not available, the client must not cache the result of a DNS lookup > for longer than XX minutes. In either case, the client must immediately > discard a name lookup result if a network error occurs when using the > result to initiate a connection. Your version looks OK to me. I have no real rationale for my XX=10 minutes, other than that it seemed like a good enough XX to allow load balancing between mirrors through dynamic DNS remapping. Too high a value for XX (like the DNS worst case default, if such a thing exists) would not sufficiently encourage client authors in making code to get the real TTL. >Dave Morris Koen.
Received on Monday, 1 April 1996 09:26:37 UTC