moving on from:? Re: stopping amplification

[Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz>]

So, it looks like DNS amplification isn't the problem to solve. 
(Based on a sample set of 2.)  Do we branch into another set of 
questions, or live contentedly with status quo?

At 20:02 +0200 3/28/06, bert hubert wrote:

> I wonder how well other recursors do, and might perhaps not be performing
> any useful role at all in attenuating packets.

Okay - then let's address that.

Is the resolver's algorithm something of concern to the 
interoperability of the protocol's implementations?  (I ask because 
this is my gating function for what I think is a candidate for DNSEXT 
WG.  Mind you - "my gating" - a non-authortiative measure.)

Or should DNSOP make some judgement on the footprint of damage by a 
less than optimal resolver algorithm?
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

Nothin' more exciting than going to the printer to watch the toner drain...

--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>