Re: [dnsext] WGLC ENDS0-bis

Edward Lewis <> Thu, 12 May 2011 20:38 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48E1FE067C for <>; Thu, 12 May 2011 13:38:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Jxy0d0Fnn2hS for <>; Thu, 12 May 2011 13:38:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ED4AE066E for <>; Thu, 12 May 2011 13:38:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Work-Laptop-2.local ( []) by (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4CKctTb002377; Thu, 12 May 2011 16:38:55 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from
Received: from [] by Work-Laptop-2.local (PGP Universal service); Thu, 12 May 2011 16:38:56 -0400
X-PGP-Universal: processed; by Work-Laptop-2.local on Thu, 12 May 2011 16:38:56 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a06240800c9f1f2d922d2@[]>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <a06240800c9ef2d544226@[]> <>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 16:38:52 -0400
To: "<>" <>
From: Edward Lewis <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on
Cc: Edward Lewis <>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] WGLC ENDS0-bis
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 20:38:59 -0000

At 15:19 +0000 5/12/11, Ray Bellis wrote:

>I believe the intent of 6.8 is to reflect 5625, where I put in text along
>the lines of "if you're trying to be transparent, make sure you don't strip
>the EDNS0 options".

I think that is a fine principle and well stated - what the section 
is trying to impart.  But I'm talking more basically about a lack of 
a definition of middle box in this document.  What I'm hinting at is 
including a reference where the term is already defined or a 
paragraph defining the term.

>In both cases I wanted to cite the hop-by-hop principle but couldn't find
>relevant chapter and verse to back it up.

More text is needed then.  Given some time I'll try to come up with something.

I wrote this "the fact that the DNS is not a client-server  protocol, 
as it is usually treated in text, but a client-cache-server 
 protocol".  Beginning with that, there is a difference between 
hop-by-hop and end-to-end in most DNS messages supporting a 
transaction.  The data model, backed up by DNSSEC, is pretty much 
built to be end-to-end.  EDNS0 on the other hand is hop-by-hop, 
taking parameters governing the message exchange from one entity to 
the next, not along the entire end-to-end path that the data travels.

...That's a first scratch of what is needed.  Admittedly it is not 
fleshed out enough to be clear and come to the point.  But I'm just 
squeezed for time now.

Edward Lewis             
NeuStar                    You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468

Now, don't say I'm always complaining.
Wait, that's a complaint, isn't it?