IETF Logo Mail Archive

[dnsext] TTL on DS records

"Wessels, Duane" <dwessels@verisign.com> Sat, 21 February 2015 01:19 UTC

Return-Path: <dwessels@verisign.com>
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AE3F1A0387 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:19:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
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 OpfdghJYBdFE for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:19:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qg0-f100.google.com (mail-qg0-f100.google.com [209.85.192.100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C6961A0687 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:19:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qg0-f100.google.com with SMTP id f51so1683992qge.3 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:19:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:thread-topic:thread-index:date :message-id:accept-language:content-language:content-type :mime-version; bh=ySmsK9c7RjUduDNiP2VrWRNwhCpMJBiyCtnhwmCIAuY=; b=e6Q1WexzqyM2+QPokmtGjrI5C4juM6cbxmlXcflVBdd5hKR4u8Zmc1uQrrltXJdvdz QNPf9dnlrT7xmOX/hB7chTtboUf0h/l0/TwC6edmFF6NscJmWSTz+wGtpZoAcJvY704S vKG+8U2GnQ0zuPFfLL+Uj636mBxzrbkPyUxBonGWrKnVfxSf5xzYOY2b66sQ+u1m8kWr F61zajmJzl64jLdXkJlNFu3U5sqyV5XWXIuw8tL9kWWZa7URDgwMAOUFTQoLZyMslM44 AOjxDxJiRBEy22GFbsMby5f5xkTJBKYv+sKJa4idZbJTZUVy1Km1W4jL5z7y6u02M46P CTFw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn8BnG445uI70j83jwKQG4kZjYJeS8er+8d4xWhfwGwMuZXy0E49NEw1C6ASTGX3/h1p++aLxpRsOwaCXhlEHpk/StZ5Q==
X-Received: by 10.140.20.226 with SMTP id 89mr1237523qgj.16.1424481547416; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:19:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from brn1lxmailout02.verisign.com (brn1lxmailout02.verisign.com. [72.13.63.42]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j6sm7445684qcm.4.2015.02.20.17.19.07 for <dnsext@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:19:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Relaying-Domain: verisign.com
Received: from BRN1WNEXCHM01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (brn1wnexchm01 [10.173.152.255]) by brn1lxmailout02.verisign.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t1L1J6mi021187 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 20:19:06 -0500
Received: from BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([::1]) by BRN1WNEXCHM01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 20:19:05 -0500
From: "Wessels, Duane" <dwessels@verisign.com>
To: "dnsext@ietf.org" <dnsext@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: TTL on DS records
Thread-Index: AQHQTXRiA48Y24/0eE+eVFKI53a0WQ==
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2015 01:19:04 +0000
Message-ID: <FB3C26C9-BC39-4819-9BE8-167E2A3711B7@verisign.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.173.152.4]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9D36D4C2-06A9-44EC-B199-1495EB7FB495"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsext/G-7sT1d3Vzw33pMKbXmI7qTEwm4>
Subject: [dnsext] TTL on DS records
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Sat, 21 Feb 2015 01:19:10 -0000

Section 5 of RFC 4034 says:

   The DS RR has no special TTL requirements.

While RFC 4035 Section 2.4 says:

   The TTL of a DS RRset SHOULD match the TTL of the delegating NS RRset

Due the "SHOULD" I'm not sure this is worthy of an errata, but seems rather unfortunate.

Apologies if this is a previously known issue.

DW

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email