IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] errata on RFC1034 for recursive aliasing and name based diffrentiation

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com> Fri, 04 March 2011 12:02 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@shinkuro.com>
X-Original-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AD673A6994 for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Mar 2011 04:02:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.575
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.575 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.024, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id an7wdDzLpNCQ for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Mar 2011 04:02:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC2163A68A2 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Mar 2011 04:02:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from crankycanuck.ca (69-196-144-230.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.144.230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E80551ECB41D for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Mar 2011 12:03:50 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 07:03:49 -0500
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com>
To: dnsext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20110304120348.GE16012@shinkuro.com>
References: <20110227191542.6824.qmail@joyce.lan> <335963D7-3440-45E6-843C-38F419462792@cisco.com> <4D6C3FD3.7010801@ucd.ie> <20110303114148.A360FB98E2E@drugs.dv.isc.org> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1103031148130.14985@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk> <4D703A35.9080207@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <4D705952.6000409@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4D705952.6000409@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Subject: Re: [dnsext] errata on RFC1034 for recursive aliasing and name based diffrentiation
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 12:02:44 -0000

No hat.

On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 12:15:30PM +0900, Masataka Ohta wrote:

> Thus, while CNAME (and BNAME) chains should be discouraged,
> it should be explicitly allowed to use CNAME as a target of
> PTR, MX, SVR and so on which does not cause recursion loops,
> which is useful for name based differentiation of a service
> on a single host.

I'm not sure I fully agree (or don't -- I just don't know) with your
reasoning, but even if I did I don't believe we could handle this as
an erratum.  Too many implementations have depended on the "no CNAME
target" rule to write off all that history as collective misreading of
the spec.

A


-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@shinkuro.com
Shinkuro, Inc.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email