- From: Josh Goodall <joshua@qutonic.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 08:52:26 +1100
- To: "William Chan (陈智昌)" <willchan@chromium.org>
- Cc: IETF HTTP WG <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 28 Feb 2014, at 6:34 am, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org> wrote: > It'd be curious to see which client would respect this MUST and the preference ordering you described. The game-theoretic view of browser competition was an illuminating unpack, thank you. It especially applies in the case where a user has an unreliable connection and/or ISP DNS resolver. Then they will choose a browser that minimises the pain. So browser vendors will implement for that. I get it. > Note that none of what I've said necessarily applies to optionally doing SRV and using it when the results are available. It's mostly the MUST requirement and the serial behavior you've outlined that looks troubling from an actual deployment viewpoint. Logically - this is similar but faster than serial and safer/more deterministic than the current lookup race - how about allowing a parallel query (as a MAY) but requiring the SRV (or SVCINFO) answer to be NXDOMAIN before proceeding to use address records? In the common case (which is what we should optimise for) the answers should be returned from the resolver close enough to simultaneously not to impact the user. This could be specified as simply a refinement to RFC6555 “Happy Eyeballs” which some browsers may already implement. Note that in the worst case, i.e. a legacy site with no service name records and unreliable authoritative nameservers, they are already screwed by the unreliable nameservers. But ISP resolvers will help with caching the service name NXDOMAIN to much the same extent as they already do the address records. So this is not in my view a case to worry about. Note also also that in RFC 4472 “Considerations with IPv6 DNS” the first recommendation to avoid nondeterministic race conditions is “use service name records”, with ease of migration being a primary reason. This process, now, is pretty much the only opportunity to make that happen. Josh.
Received on Thursday, 27 February 2014 21:52:59 UTC