Re: [dnsext] Some thoughts on the updated aliasing draft

Paul Vixie <vixie@isc.org> Sun, 27 March 2011 05:28 UTC

Return-Path: <vixie@isc.org>
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 270383A698E for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:28:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 LOttyy6EoNbI for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:28:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nsa.vix.com (unknown [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:bb:230:48ff:fe5a:2f38]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E6883A68D7 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:28:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nsa.vix.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nsa.vix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0D83A1037 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 05:29:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vixie@isc.org)
From: Paul Vixie <vixie@isc.org>
To: dnsext@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: Your message of "26 Mar 2011 20:33:36 GMT." <20110326203336.44885.qmail@joyce.lan>
References: <20110326203336.44885.qmail@joyce.lan>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.2; nmh 1.3; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22)
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 05:29:52 +0000
Message-ID: <92099.1301203792@nsa.vix.com>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Some thoughts on the updated aliasing draft
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: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 05:28:20 -0000

> Date: 26 Mar 2011 20:33:36 -0000
> From: "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
> 
> ...  In particular, it's quite possible for the DNS to have one
> canonical record with everything else pointing to it, but at the
> application level all the names look the same.  If I were hacking on
> my web or mail servers to handle this stuff, a simple way to do the
> configuration would be to configure in the canonical name, and then
> set a flag saying also to handle all of the aliases.

if we're allowed by the people asking for this to require dns client
libraries and applications to have to be changed to handle a new kind
of canonicalization before they'll be able to handle the new definition
of "sameness" then this is a practical approach.

'dns client libraries and applications' means the whole internet, so i
naturally assumed that this approach was out of scope.