Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Justify keeping AliasForm and ServiceForm in one RR type, or split them into two #125

Open
bemasc opened this issue Mar 10, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

Comments

@bemasc
Copy link
Collaborator

@bemasc bemasc commented Mar 10, 2020

We've gotten multiple comments asking why AliasForm and ServiceForm aren't separate RR types. From a recursive resolver's perspective, this would simplify the processing logic. However, it would also result in double the QPS for everyone, since clients would have to fire off simultaneous queries for both Qtypes.

It seems strange to me to have a single RRset type associated to different
functionalities, i.e. Alias and Service. I suspect that it is more convenient
to have the same RRtype while requesting among different administrative
domains, but I would be happy to know the rationals for this design. I have the
impression that alias form is used to indicates the next RRtype (in our case,
SVCB) while service form indicates a terminal request.    

@enygren

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

@enygren enygren commented Mar 10, 2020

We should make sure this rationale described in the appendix and then close this as WONTFIX.

@bemasc

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@bemasc bemasc commented Mar 10, 2020

Actually, I think it's worse than double. A client, not knowing whether its recursive will perform special-case handling of these queries, has to issue both queries immediately. A recursive, upon seeing a ServiceForm query, would itself have to issue both ServiceForm and AliasForm queries, both at this point in the chain and subsequently at every point down the chain. So it somewhat more than doubles the load of the whole design, and the recursive behavior is possibly even more complex.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
2 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.