IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] Slamming the TCP door, was Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ah-dnsext-rfc1995bis-ixfr-02

Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz> Mon, 20 June 2011 22:12 UTC

Return-Path: <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz>
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 E0D699E8045 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:12:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.191
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.191 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.408, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KncRUoTPicdP for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:12:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stora.ogud.com (stora.ogud.com [66.92.146.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4CC1228015 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:12:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Work-Laptop-2.local (nyttbox.md.ogud.com [10.20.30.4]) by stora.ogud.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p5KMCTmM029552; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 18:12:31 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz)
Received: from [192.168.1.104] by Work-Laptop-2.local (PGP Universal service); Mon, 20 Jun 2011 18:12:36 -0400
X-PGP-Universal: processed; by Work-Laptop-2.local on Mon, 20 Jun 2011 18:12:36 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a06240800ca2572af1e4f@[192.168.128.30]>
In-Reply-To: <4DFF91FD.9010508@cisco.com>
References: <4DB81069.3080404@nic.cz> <4DF9B5BD.7010900@nic.cz> <a06240803ca1fd7525c50@10.31.201.23> <BANLkTinjRDHyKH-tLEoejodXb2+7qQLO7w@mail.gmail.com> <a06240801ca2102b8b4f2@10.31.201.23> <BANLkTikoVVaXF2_LJ3KHm6P7oFpfC+n2tw@mail.gmail.com> <a06240801ca21246f76de@10.31.201.23> <BANLkTinVfuL0WEYwaycTaAnWDS9vYF5NjQ@mail.gmail.com> <4DFEFBDE.4030303@nlnetlabs.nl> <1308572047.2742.37.camel@shane-desktop> <a06240801ca24edde2b90@[192.168.1.104]> <20110620125420.E9F9D10EF90C@drugs.dv.isc.org> <a06240802ca24f57df4ca@[192.168.128.30]> <4DFF91FD.9010508@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 18:08:40 -0400
To: Josh Littlefield <joshl@cisco.com>
From: Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.20.30.4
Cc: Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz>, dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Slamming the TCP door, was Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ah-dnsext-rfc1995bis-ixfr-02
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: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:12:43 -0000

At 14:31 -0400 6/20/11, Josh Littlefield wrote:

>Unfortunately RFC 1995 spells that out no more clearly than RFC 1034,
>but we've had interoperable implementations that understood the proper
>framing of IXFR for more than a decade.

Well, that clears things up.

I then prefer leaving the IXFR-only proposal as is in the draft. 
Slamming the connection closed seems wasteful, especially in the 
cases when you may have already received the whole zone while 
deciding to look elsewhere.

I don't think there's text that needs fixing.  What got me was that I 
see IXFR as a UDP thing and think of it in constrained environments. 
The last paragraph of section 5 talks more (than RFC 1995 did) about 
IXFR over TCP.

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

I'm overly entertained.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email