Subject: Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-unknown-rrs-04.txt

From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 14:16:26 -0700

At 18:49 +0000 2/10/03, Paul Vixie wrote:
>>  Seems like the WG needs to figure out whether they want to allow or
>>  prohibit compression in SIG and NXT.
>
>the question is, whether compression of the names buys us enough octets
>to pay for the complexity of a strategy like "you can use compression if
>using this data in an EDNS0-signalled proof, but not in response to a
>normal query or transfer".  my own thinking on this is, "not."  that's
>because the names aren't always going to have similarities with other
>names in the same message (making compression nonbneficial), and also
>even a successful compression delta will be dwarfed by the size of the
>signature and key data (making compression irrelevant overall).

I was going to argue with Paul until I saw the above paragraph. 
Compression in these two records is not worth the cost needed to be 
able to do it.
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                          +1-703-227-9854
ARIN Research Engineer

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