On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 08:53:47AM -0500, Sauer, Damon wrote:
I am reading as much as I can and with either scheme I can't see where
this would not, at minimum, double the load on the DNS system.
...
Could the record first have a pointer in DNS that would tell it where
to look and how many bytes the record is?
That's exactly the problem I tried to solve with RMX++.
But nobody listens. Everyone is absolutely bound to the
fixed idea of storing everything in DNS, no matter whether
DNS is suitable or not. Nobody cares about how DNS works
internally. Just (ab)use the TXT records as an arbitrary storage
system. Did anyone ever listen to the DNS people who said
"Don't do that"? Did anyone care about any other service
than e-mail? Did anyone care about capacity of DNS servers?
They say they don't want a new RR type to avoid the need
of upgrading, therefore TXT is needed.
Has anyone ever made a calculation about how much the
average DNS traffic and storage will grow and how many
DNS servers will need a hardware upgrade instead of just
a software upgrade?
Has anyone ever cared about the fact that DNS records are
internally binary packed and that they usually do not
store as text what we see when calling nslookup/dig?
This whole SPF vs. XML discussion is ridiculous.
This is not a technical discussion.
This is a religious matter.
This is SPF marketing.
Hadmut