Re: [Add] ADD Calls for WF Adoption

Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com> Sun, 31 October 2021 20:22 UTC

Return-Path: <tpauly@apple.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 E88073A14A1 for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:22:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.102
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.102 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.com
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 QRhgSHg_USt5 for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:22:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp01.apple.com (ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp01.apple.com [17.171.2.60]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4553A3A14A2 for <add@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:22:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp01.apple.com [127.0.0.1]) by ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp01.apple.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 19VKHb3g051456; Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:21:58 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=apple.com; h=content-type : content-transfer-encoding : from : mime-version : subject : date : message-id : references : cc : in-reply-to : to; s=20180706; bh=1CkZ2PSc8OMRO0bxIgiIE9LkmsNHs4td83zZ2Kmyzb8=; b=aWT6edp8HVtaIWkNpDEHmRyhpneLGH5VgB0xxW4bhEnWF53q7EqYxc5jzgvyBKrwPlAE 2gMTer/C0yWxxKmJAZxUeszEF+ubVCn0sWVP5N9Jtow8BH4x6Q5hUDOkhTq8Q+7qHK8a J2MEQOEsNvCxxp0/5dC5W8Djsl4tKtfgDf31wlPz7BFhugoRUu513XBbloxds+0XUpnZ I07rPPiUAoMkYc1KCB5sVZ7pStz6ouBLBiDG/Tp5GHdJO6Uai0JPLykebUum6LwaI38b raEVzV4ojdbnO4lBFGc7BxezJFHUchCWY9ULSzZEdNRixM+iKuGLsqi50PdHiSANAG6k BA==
Received: from rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp04.rno.apple.com (rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp04.rno.apple.com [10.225.203.152]) by ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp01.apple.com with ESMTP id 3c14q24na5-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:21:58 -0700
Received: from rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp01.rno.apple.com (rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp01.rno.apple.com [17.179.253.14]) by rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp04.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.1.0.12.20210903 64bit (built Sep 3 2021)) with ESMTPS id <0R1U00MKCZ8M8M90@rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp04.rno.apple.com>; Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:21:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from process_milters-daemon.rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp01.rno.apple.com by rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp01.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.1.0.12.20210903 64bit (built Sep 3 2021)) id <0R1U00700YRZVI00@rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp01.rno.apple.com>; Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:21:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Va-A:
X-Va-T-CD: 1c908a0f9bb9cd14a77d4746d1c6092d
X-Va-E-CD: e10df4020b815b301c79019dae621050
X-Va-R-CD: 77144842ffc6ef9d58b648c80ab9d84f
X-Va-CD: 0
X-Va-ID: 22bb80ba-a993-4322-bf28-98013a3569ce
X-V-A:
X-V-T-CD: 1c908a0f9bb9cd14a77d4746d1c6092d
X-V-E-CD: e10df4020b815b301c79019dae621050
X-V-R-CD: 77144842ffc6ef9d58b648c80ab9d84f
X-V-CD: 0
X-V-ID: d1be2cde-f9c6-42a0-a23b-800fd8d30a52
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.425, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-10-31_06:2021-10-29, 2021-10-31 signatures=0
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [10.104.89.13]) by rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp01.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.1.0.12.20210903 64bit (built Sep 3 2021)) with ESMTPSA id <0R1U005CUZ8L9J00@rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp01.rno.apple.com>; Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:21:58 -0700 (PDT)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
From: Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>
MIME-version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:21:57 -0700
Message-id: <16CDFE05-87E5-4F5E-987D-101BE50C0FE3@apple.com>
References: <41A54178-4C71-4D25-9ECE-946DBAF5E86C@gmail.com>
Cc: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, add@ietf.org, "Deen, Glenn" <Glenn_Deen=40comcast.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <41A54178-4C71-4D25-9ECE-946DBAF5E86C@gmail.com>
To: Geoff Huston <gih903@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (19C34a)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.425, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-10-31_06:2021-10-29, 2021-10-31 signatures=0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/add/vDmk7_4k0a7gGaMcUxEuH5OiEXE>
Subject: Re: [Add] ADD Calls for WF Adoption
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: Sun, 31 Oct 2021 20:22:06 -0000


> On Oct 31, 2021, at 12:17 PM, Geoff Huston <gih903@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Eric,
> 
> So here we are in a call as to whether documents should be discussed by the WG and we are doing just that. Seems to me that the adoption question is already answered.
> 
> No, I do not believe that WG adoption means that the document describes a good idea nor one that is going to lead to some published document(s). It means that a bunch of folk want to talk about it and discuss their various interpretations of the concepts exposed in the document(s). It may lead somewhere. Or it may be a set of terrible ideas and lead nowhere. And that’s fine. WG Adoption is not an endorsement of the concepts, nor should it ever be.
> 
> I support DISCUSSING these draft. I don’t necessarily agree with the draft, nor can I (or anyone else for that matter) claim that the WG “supports” these drafts until the WG discusses them. I don’t support peremptorily stopping discussion of these drafts by not adopting these document. It appears that they are in scope for the WG’s area of study, and I that’s a reasonable position to support adoption by the WG group.

On the case of the split-DNS document, I think the main crux of the issue is how a network establishes ownership over a domain in a way that clients can trust, and should trust more than other alternatives. That might be something that’s in scope if we discuss it, but I’m seriously wondering if that is a bigger problem that needs a more general mechanism that just what’s used for bootstrapping an encrypted resolver (the topic of ADD). I think having these private-scoped PvDs is quite interesting, but given that a lot of work was done for PvDs elsewhere (like in intarea), it may be that this mechanism mainly belongs in another group or a new group entirely. That’s the kind of discussion that’s useful to have prior to adoption. 

Thanks,
Tommy 
> 
> regards,
> 
>   Geoff
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On 29 Oct 2021, at 3:11 pm, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Glenn,
>> 
>> Let me start by saying that I don't agree with a number
>> of your assertions here, in particular about the requirements
>> for adoption. While it's not *simply* a matter of numbers,
>> having a reasonable level of support is in fact necessary
>> for consensus.
>> 
>> However, before we debate those, let's start by getting to common
>> facts. I believe Tommy wrote you with concerns about both drafts, but
>> let's start with draft-boucadair-add-deployment-considerations.
>> 
>> I have provided you with a list of the people expressing each
>> position. Your message lists Jim Reid and Diego Lopez.  I am unable to
>> find a message indicating support for this draft from Diego though did
>> find one from Jim Reid. However, in that search I also find a message
>> somewhat opposing adoption from Martin Thomson (I belive he is opposed
>> so I'm sure I can arrange for a more direct message if you like).
>> 
>> So, can you please provide links to the messages from people who
>> are in support of this draft?
>> 
>> -Ekr
>> 
>> On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 8:57 AM Deen, Glenn <Glenn_Deen=40comcast.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>> Hi ADD,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I wanted to bring to the ADD Group’s attention that 2 documents have entered into CALL for WG Adoption in the last couple of days:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>    • Draft-reddy-add-enterprise-split-dns   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-reddy-add-enterprise-split-dns/
>> 
>> 
>>    • Draft-boucadair-add-deployment-considerations https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-boucadair-add-deployment-considerations/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Both drafts are material that has had good discussion both on list and during past ADD meetings so please consult the archive and meeting minutes, especially IETF110 and IETF111 if you need additional background.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Both are in a 2 week call for adoption, with the first ending on Oct 26,2021 and the second on Oct 27,2021.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Please respond on list with comments on these calls.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> Glenn
>> 
>> -- 
>> Add mailing list
>> Add@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/add
>> -- 
>> Add mailing list
>> Add@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/add
> 
> -- 
> Add mailing list
> Add@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/add