IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] Obsoleting SPF RRTYPE

David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> Thu, 25 April 2013 22:46 UTC

Return-Path: <drc@virtualized.org>
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 039B021F970F for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:46:21 -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=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0FkH3+TF7-lz for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:46:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from trantor.virtualized.org (trantor.virtualized.org [199.48.134.42]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B62A21F8C14 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:46:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.2] (unknown [12.6.90.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: drc) by trantor.virtualized.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D46F417166; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 22:46:19 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <33B808F3-C826-4EBC-8AF5-3E9CE669407B@vpnc.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:46:18 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <BCD8BF2A-70B7-4F20-A03C-06F1B2EEB104@virtualized.org>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130423150008.0c2c0558@elandnews.com> <33B808F3-C826-4EBC-8AF5-3E9CE669407B@vpnc.org>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503)
Cc: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>, DNSEXT Working Group <dnsext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Obsoleting SPF RRTYPE
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 22:46:21 -0000

Paul,

On Apr 25, 2013, at 8:33 AM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
>> Is the annotation in the DNS Parameters registry correct?
> Yes, it is correct.
> 
> Isn't it amazing that the DNSEXT WG can't answer a simple question without turning it into a lecture about How Things Would Be Done If We Were Kings and Queens? (Actually, no one even bothered to answer the question...)

Err, might want to step down off that high horse: might be causing cerebral hypoxia. :)

In my response that seems to have touched off this thread, I stated: 

"It is in keeping with past practice, e.g., see the notations for MD, MF, A6, and the MAILA RRtypes at http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters/dns-parameters.xml."

I'd also point out some inconsistencies in the registry (e.g., NXT should probably say "OBSOLETE - use NSEC") and sillinesses (e.g., what's the point of replicating the RR type's name as the meaning?) but that's probably something for a different thread.

Regards,
-drc

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email