Post #2447687
2026-05-09 06:25 UTC
@freci@piaille.fr @dalias@hachyderm.io Google always argues with round-trips, latency, etc. Adam Langley also wrote this about DANE back in 2015:
we probably still wouldn’t implement this aspect of DANE because each extra lookup is more latency and another chance for packet loss to cause an expensive timeout and retransmit.
It was a decade ago, yet 15 years into Google Ads filling the web with ads, burning bandwidth, latency and adding round-trips.
Whenever I see arguments by Google in context of #DNSSEC, I assume it’s in bad faith.
@stiiin@infosec.space @SRAZKVT@tech.lgbt
Replies (1)
-
@dalias@hachyderm.io 2026-05-09 12:45
@i@toot.pouyan.net @stiiin@infosec.space @freci@piaille.fr @SRAZKVT@tech.lgbt It's not even an extra round trip. It's a DNS lookup which should be cached nearby, and which can be done concurrently with the A and AAAA ones.