3 ms·

Presumably this could be mitigated by the DNS request needing padding?

• pkulak 4y ago
  Pretty sucky to have to bloat a fundamental protocol of the internet, and thus, all traffic, forever, to avoid amplification attacks.
  • Aachen 4y ago
    Queries are already larger than necessary, and often two are sent where one is needed (which adds UDP, IP, Ethernet, probably also WiFi header overhead) to get both v4 and v6 while the DNS protocol technically supports multiple queries in one packet. While I don't disagree with your point in principle, it must be said that if we cared about fourty extra bytes just so the most common records can be answered without amplification (a quite significant problem currently) then we should start by optimizing existing unnecessary inefficiencies.
    • zamadatix 4y ago
      The thing you find fault with was caused by exactly the kind of thinking proposed to do so it doesn't seem to make sense it can itself be justification for that thinking being alright. Many people regret the dual lookup solution as it causes nearly twice the pps load on public servers these days to work around issues with servers of the time. In ~2005 it was seen as easier to implement as clients could opt in to do it with nothing needed from the server (plus how much longer could IPv6 deployment take right /s) and now in 2022 it seems impossible to un-implement as you'd need to make sure every authoritative server and client in the world stop relying on the behavior to do so. This in no way implies that going forward every solution should get a free pass on being inefficient it just means we allowed the easy bloating answer before and it bit us in a way we can't easily fix now.