[as112-ops] Extensible AS112 Service

[Aleksi Suhonen]

On 07/21/11 18:09, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> Also, while DNAME is standards track, it's never been used in anger before.
>   So while it would certainly seem to fix some problems associated with the
> operation of AS112, we have no telemetry to indicate how well or badly it
> would work.  If we were to use it for AS112, it would certainly be very
> interesting and would likely shake out a whole pile of implementation
> problems (which has a lot of merit from the point of view of protocol
> development), I would question whether this would be an appropriate first
> large-scale production use of DNAMEs.

I believe the new Chinese TLDs are already using DNAMEs to link the 
traditional charset zone and the simplified charset zone together. I 
understand that there are also other IDN TLDs out there that do 
something similar, but I don't have any pointers for those.

William F. Maton quoted RFC3363 and RFC2874. Those were doing something 
completely different and in a completely different way than what I was 
suggesting here. They aren't even compatible with the current ip6.arpa 
zone and they are irrelevant to this discussion.

However, Marco D'Itri pointed out that the default lifetimes for the 
CNAMEs generated by DNAMEs are very short. This means that the DNAMEs I 
suggested wouldn't deflect the load from the reverse root servers very 
efficiently, unless they started giving longer lifetimes to DNAME and 
CNAME records. This would probably require changing running code on 
crucial infrastructure.

-- 
	+358 4567 02048 / http://www.trex.fi/
	Aleksi Suhonen / TREX  Tampere Region Exchange Oy