<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div><br><div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">On Oct 23, 2014, at 8:12 PM, Paul Wouters <<a href="mailto:paul@nohats.ca">paul@nohats.ca</a>> wrote:<br><br></span></div><blockquote type="cite"><font color="#000000"><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Have you talked to operators world wide on what the query load on their<br>caching resolvers is?</span></font></blockquote><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)"><br></span><div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">It seems to me that if the goal is to flatten & decentralize name resolution & other directory services, then the only way to accomplish it is to go whole-hog with something along the lines of PNRP.</span></div><div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)"><br></span></div><div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Otherwise, the current system is the least worst model, IMHO. A hybrid approach is all too llikely to accrue the disadvantages of both approaches whilst nullifying their respective advantages, as well as engendering new disadvantages. </span></div><div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)"><br></span></div>-----------------------------------<br><div>Roland Dobbins <<a href="mailto:rdobbins@arbor.net">rdobbins@arbor.net</a>></div></div><div><br><div><br></div></div></body></html>