[ratelimits] I-D-ing rate limiting?

[WBrown at e1b.org]

> From: Edward Lewis <ed.lewis at neustar.biz>

> I said that before, but with three implementers(*) out there, I 
> think it's time.  Especially as the implementations still differ yet
> are interoperable.

Isn't the interoperability due to the fact that RRL only interacts with 
DNS clients, not other authoritative name servers.  In that case, is there 
really a need for all versions to work exactly the the same?   Shouldn't a 
DNS server be able to protect itself in any manner the authors feel works 
best as long as reasonable clients can resolve their queries?

As more is learned about rate limiting, perhaps best practices can be 
developed, and some things that are done now may be proven ineffective, 
but does any of this need to ultimately end up as an RFC?



Confidentiality Notice: 
This electronic message and any attachments may contain confidential or 
privileged information, and is intended only for the individual or entity 
identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee (or the 
employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the addressee), or if this 
message has been addressed to you in error, you are hereby notified that 
you may not copy, forward, disclose or use any part of this message or any 
attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail or 
telephone and delete this message from your system.