Paul Vixie wrote:
some number of vendors have depended on revenue from selling this
feature but i'd say that only a small number of sites ever saw any
benefit from it.
pool.ntp.org, security.debian.org, rsync.gentoo.org,
[a-o].ns.spamhaus.org, [a-n].surbl.org. In general the "large RRset"
approach is used by those who do not buy special DNS appliance to serve
their zones, I think.
i'm not sure we're in the same discussion. pool.ntp.org is using short
ttl and silent truncation and round robin. there's no geo-ip stability
that could be hurt by client-side reordering or rerandomizing. and the
nameserver examples you gave are all subject to rdns RTT sorting. the
"large RRset" approach works just fine, and is not related to Rule 9.
pool.ntp.org divides itself up into subdomains (okay they are really
hostnames) for each country-code so that you get addresses in that
country code. NTP in the future will take advantage of the fact that it
gets back multiple addresses and will use more than just one of them to
find NTP servers. The order does not really matter and it's better that
there be no particular order so that we do not overload any one server.
Danny
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf