Re: [BEHAVE] auth48 changes to draft-ietf-behave-dns64

[Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>]

I'm OK with these changes.

Jari

Dan Wing kirjoitti:
> During auth48 of draft-ietf-behave-dns64-11.txt, it was realized that 
> two sections were not consistent.
>
> The text in Section 5.1.1 is clear:
>
>    If there is (non-excluded) AAAA data available, DNS64
>    SHOULD NOT include synthetic AAAA RRs in the response (see Appendix A
>    for an analysis of the motivations for and the implications of not
>    complying with this recommendation).  By default, DNS64
>    implementations MUST NOT synthesize AAAA RRs when real AAAA RRs
>    exist
>
> That is, SHOULD NOT in the general case, and MUST NOT as a default case.
> This represents WG consensus.
>
>
> But then 5.1.4 says something slightly different:
>
>    If it receives an answer with at
>    least one AAAA record containing an address outside any of the
>    excluded range(s), then it MAY build an answer section for a response
>    including only the AAAA record(s) that do not contain any of the
>    addresses inside the excluded ranges.  That answer section is used in
>    the assembly of a response as detailed in Section 5.4.
>    Alternatively, it MAY treat the answer as though it were an empty
>    answer, and proceed accordingly.  It MUST NOT return the offending
>    AAAA records as part of a response.
>
> It seems rather self-defeating to have excluded ranges and then 
> ignore those.  Then the only issue is: if there are both an 
> excluded AAAA record and a non-excluded one, the above says you 
> can either return the good one, or not return any AAAA records. 
>
> The proposal is to change the "MAY build an answer section" in 5.1.4
> to "by default MUST build an answer section", so it would read as
> follows.  The critical changes are highlighted with "^":
>
>    When the DNS64 performs its initial AAAA query, if it receives an
>    answer with only AAAA records containing addresses in the excluded
>    range(s), then it MUST treat the answer as though it were an empty
> .....................^^^^
>    answer, and proceed accordingly.  If it receives an answer with at
>    least one AAAA record containing an address outside any of the
>    excluded range(s), then it by default SHOULD build an answer section
> .................................^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>    for a response including only the AAAA record(s) that do not contain
>    any of the addresses inside the excluded ranges.  That answer section
>    is used in the assembly of a response as detailed in Section 5.4.
>    Alternatively, it MAY treat the answer as though it were an empty
>    answer, and proceed accordingly.  It MUST NOT return the offending
>    AAAA records as part of a response.
>  
> We believe this is in line with the WG consensus in section 5.1.1.
>
>
> The updated files are here:
>   http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc6147.txt
>   http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc6147.xml
>   http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc6147-diff.html
>
>
> We are soliciting feedback for this change until noon (Prague time)
> on Friday, April 1.  Please send feedback to [e-mail].
>
> -d
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>
>