IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Add] [EXTERNAL] My single use case

Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> Thu, 10 September 2020 15:37 UTC

Return-Path: <jim@rfc1035.com>
X-Original-To: add@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: add@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D87F3A09A9 for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 08:37:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VfiVfjjbvMDL for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 08:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shaun.rfc1035.com (shaun.rfc1035.com [93.186.33.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 520853A0992 for <add@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 08:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gromit.rfc1035.com (gromit.rfc1035.com [195.54.233.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shaun.rfc1035.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A368F24205EC; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 15:37:15 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.6\))
From: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
In-Reply-To: <DM6PR00MB07815F5B6F43F63DB23485A7FA271@DM6PR00MB0781.namprd00.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 16:37:14 +0100
Cc: ADD Mailing list <add@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6D7363F8-4EA1-4E91-8672-90122A2CCF39@rfc1035.com>
References: <d4bd287a-d2ce-40cd-b635-4f74efbc77f6@www.fastmail.com> <DM6PR00MB07815F5B6F43F63DB23485A7FA271@DM6PR00MB0781.namprd00.prod.outlook.com>
To: Tommy Jensen <Jensen.Thomas=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.6)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/add/QrlUPatfXhJE205VJZdEqUdW4Sk>
Subject: Re: [Add] [EXTERNAL] My single use case
X-BeenThere: add@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Applications Doing DNS <add.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/add>, <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/add/>
List-Post: <mailto:add@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/add>, <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 15:37:21 -0000


> On 10 Sep 2020, at 16:27, Tommy Jensen <Jensen.Thomas=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> > Specifically, I want to NOT learn about whether the resolver does [...]
> 
> +1, I couldn't agree more.

Ditto.

> One exception would be zone ownership for me as I don't consider that a policy, but I agree that's a scenario separate from the one you are describing and should be kept separate.

What has zone ownership - whatever that means - got to do with resolution transports or resolver selection? How is it relevant to this WG?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email