IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dbound] department of poor memory, was Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dcrocker-dns-perimeter-00.txt

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Thu, 04 April 2019 16:01 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: dbound@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dbound@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27D2C120607 for <dbound@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 09:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=6Lri8Dfj; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=WF/+xj9e
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 ujW8sJp4jIQk for <dbound@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 09:01:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 A528E1205CD for <dbound@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 09:00:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 82908 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2019 16:00:48 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=143da.5ca62a30.k1904; bh=FGGDGUlY9/RnHKZuP3QGpKdd5JsanougEU8y81nl1gY=; b=6Lri8Dfj/Ye3HDl1nsEwniMCBuVfEA91YkITl54PNqPeZVSwWB40hG5YP8quks2b1j6sDGb6fkDJT5LjBOO3KNeNpBbCtwFTj9WM+Q3njAJ/23t32687YG2U03QCptFYR+xYtxIYWvTZ62oxbOB7ZiSuygO1YEX3EdqKMRNjO9UMADNQYQayP7IFuLh61tH6TBZZyyW3hEfPGjonkEfkfgRWNdR7EGJzJ8hODDDM04hkfEq3rHNGDiGepG31Vobm
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=143da.5ca62a30.k1904; bh=FGGDGUlY9/RnHKZuP3QGpKdd5JsanougEU8y81nl1gY=; b=WF/+xj9eLe/2lGEeDqBAtl1fQ0aduwHSwWNUDTwTo5DJ7cItwRrxtJHrdO/q6zfmEoQK9cUgUMOJ8Gac21Tw611qDQq5lsA81If3U+E4MTLiEDflosRlg2Ig6T2tsj07Yh1T1VVEf5aIaP5LAg6+qPZ8cQ/ZHSsWdNeFptcSsju+OqE9S35Qoc6VHtGMW5riK3nuh9FCY1caA465ckDasXq9sLxJPbC346jeGmcr8eJs0QWnylj59c/ODB6i54AL
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTP via TCP6; 04 Apr 2019 16:00:48 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id B5A292011692FD; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 12:00:47 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2019 12:00:47 -0400
Message-Id: <20190404160047.B5A292011692FD@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dbound@ietf.org
Cc: dcrocker@bbiw.net
In-Reply-To: <09cdb203-f926-70cd-3f7b-b06cdc48a11b@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dbound/5K0h2ojKBZHXgUSkxbtI_H1MhcI>
Subject: Re: [dbound] department of poor memory, was Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dcrocker-dns-perimeter-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dbound@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS tree bounds <dbound.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dbound>, <mailto:dbound-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dbound/>
List-Post: <mailto:dbound@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dbound-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dbound>, <mailto:dbound-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2019 16:01:49 -0000

In article <09cdb203-f926-70cd-3f7b-b06cdc48a11b@dcrocker.net> you write:
>On 4/4/2019 6:43 AM, John R. Levine wrote:
>> If you want to compare apples to apples, you might want to adjust the 
>> draft to compare your prefixed TXT records to my prefixed TXT records.
>
>What specific wording changes to the draft are you suggesting?

Honestly, now that I look at it again, it's clear that none of the
proposed hacks to avoid tree walks will work, and anything that needs
tree walks is dead on arrival, so there's not much point.

If you want to keep at it, as far as I can tell, the main differences
between my 2016 proposal and this one is that I use code numbers to
identify different kinds of boundaries and you use strings, easy
enough to change either way, and yours requires walking up the tree
one level at a time which can be a lot of lookups if people send
hostile requests while mine does one lookup per defined boundary.

You might check and see if I missed anything.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email