Subject: [dnsoverhttp] Thinking about inlining DNS in HTTP

From: Patrick McManus <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:29:37 -0400

Anyone want to talk about the general model of pushing DNS records to
clients as part of HTTP? This was originally part of the SPDY documents,
but was never fully implemented there and never made it into HTTP/2 due to
its experimental and speculative nature (unlike the rest of what became
h2). But a number of folks, including myself, think the idea still holds
significant promise.

Briefly, if www.example.com were to include references to content on
www.cdn.com it would be able to staple, unsolicited, at the protocol level
the necessary DNS records for the cdn into the http response containing the
reference. .presumably with a complete dnssec chain inline. Since
example.com pushes this information to different folks all the time, it can
have the chain cached suitably to the lifetime of the records in the chain.
Because the client can verify the information via dnssec it can go ahead
and connect www.cdn.com without the round trips necessary for resolution.

Remembering that this is bar bof fodder, If the HTTP folks were interested
in going down this path with an extension to h2 what would the guidance
from the dns folk be on corner cases to consider?

-Patrick

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:44:34 -0700

On 16 September 2016 at 09:29, Patrick McManus <[email-masked]> wrote:
> clients as part of HTTP? This was originally part of the SPDY documents, but
> was never fully implemented there and never made it into HTTP/2 due to its
> experimental and speculative nature (unlike the rest of what became h2). But
> a number of folks, including myself, think the idea still holds significant
> promise.

If we go with the notion that you can use RFC 4501 and GET, then
HTTP/2 server push will just work.  That's a powerful notion.

---

From: Patrick McManus <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:03:41 -0400

> HTTP/2 server push will just work.  That's a powerful notion.

bingo.. that's why I wanted to raise it concretely when we were talking
about more traditional http api things. We would be able to get a two-fer
if things went in that direction. (or more!)

to be fair there is some squishiness around scoping the data (or not) to
the stream that pushed it - but that's a general area of
evolution/fuzziness for push, not really dns specific.