[dnsext] an open issue for 2672bis (Re: Heads up: WGLC and recall)

JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@isc.org> Tue, 19 April 2011 16:48 UTC

Return-Path: <jinmei@isc.org>
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 944DEE0809 for <dnsext@ietfc.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:48:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.601
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I2wfE5WW1ZLm for <dnsext@ietfc.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:48:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ams1.isc.org (mx.ams1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:500:60::65]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E07BE07A8 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:48:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bikeshed.isc.org (bikeshed.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:d::19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "bikeshed.isc.org", Issuer "ISC CA" (verified OK)) by mx.ams1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D63B55F9863; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 16:48:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jinmei@isc.org)
Received: from jmb.jinmei.org (99-105-57-202.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D5A14216C33; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 16:48:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jinmei@isc.org)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:48:32 -0700
Message-ID: <m2ei4yyyov.wl%jinmei@isc.org>
From: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@isc.org>
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com>
In-Reply-To: <20110413151019.GJ24471@shinkuro.com>
References: <20110413151019.GJ24471@shinkuro.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) Emacs/22.1 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Cc: dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: [dnsext] an open issue for 2672bis (Re: Heads up: WGLC and recall)
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: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 16:48:59 -0000

At Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:10:19 -0400,
Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com> wrote:

> First, this is a recall notice on draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2672bis-dname.
> The draft is currently at -21.  This draft previously went through
> WGLC at version -17, and needed some more work.  In the opinion of the
> document shepherd (me), all the issues with that document are
> addressed.

As far as I remember there's a minor open issue on this draft:

At this stage, I'd personally suggest removing section 3.2 because
according to the technical discussion the conclusion seemed to be it
didn't make sense and because no one has complained about
compatibility in existing implementations or deployment.

But if the majority of the wg thinks it's too minor to block this
document further, I don't object.

JINMEI, Tatuya
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.