[tptacek]

It's not just "robustness". Not supporting TCP DNS breaks DNS if your responses are "large", for values of "large" that include numbers that are in fact very small.

[34tlkjlaegrlk]

largest safe size to use is ~548 bytes - anything more than that and you need tcp

[zamadatix]

Or, as the article says, EDNS.

[blueflow]

Its okay to ignore "modern" features if they create bad edge cases.

[tptacek]

This feature is from 1986.

[blueflow]

So are absolute domain names, but everyone is using relative domain specifications now, omitting the final dot.

HTTP Transfer-Encoding also got specified, and then collectively mis-implemented.

That its in the standard for decades doesnt mean it will be good when used.

[tptacek]

This doesn't make sense as an argument. Without TCP DNS, you're stuck with an untenably low limit for how much data can fit in a DNS response. Not having TCP DNS breaks DNS. It's not an aesthetic argument.

[charcircuit]

I can use absolute domain names just fine in the software I use.