"trivial" changes to DNS (was: OpenNTPProject.org)

Cb B cb.list6 at gmail.com
Thu Jan 16 18:20:15 UTC 2014

On Jan 16, 2014 10:16 AM, "Saku Ytti" <saku at ytti.fi> wrote:
> On (2014-01-16 09:19 -0800), Cb B wrote:
> > I hope QUIC does not stay on UDP, as it may find itself cut off at the
> > legs.
> Any new L4 would need to support both flavours, over UDP and native. Over
> is needed to be deployable right now and be working to vast majority of
> end users.
> Native-only would present chicken and egg problem, goog/fb/amzn/msft etc
> add support to it, because failure rate is too high, and stateful box
> won't add support, because no customer demand.
> And what becomes to deployment pace, good technologies which give
benefits to
> end users can and have been deployed very fast.
> IPv6 does not give benefit to end users, EDNS does not give benefit to end
> users.
> QUIC/MinimaLT/IETF-transport-standardized-version would give benefit to
> users, all persistent connections like ssh would keep running when you
> between networks.
> You could in your homeserver specifically allow /you/ to connect to any
> service, regardless of your IP address, because key is your identity, not
> IP address. (So sort of LISPy thing going on here, we'd make IP more
> information which it should be, it wouldn't be identity anymore)
> Parity packets have potential to give much better performance in packet
> conditions. Packet pacing seems much better on fast to slow file
> --
>   ++ytti

Then let's go all the way with ILNP. I like that.


More information about the NANOG mailing list