Re: [dnsext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4343 (6361)
Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Wed, 23 December 2020 04:15 UTC
Return-Path: <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
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 6F5443A0062 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:15:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.848
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.848 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 ZCooagpiyKgC for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:15:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-il1-x130.google.com (mail-il1-x130.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::130]) (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 A92233A005D for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:15:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-il1-x130.google.com with SMTP id k8so13923364ilr.4 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:15:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=BE9aMgA59t92gtdA0TOVCIc3j2BnDsI64o5oYhL6cCE=; b=cNldGuAm57Wb3vLAbFrF064JHt6e/pZZpKxQnY2p0HHU1J2Wm/cpt+hzbQ2on7gOzq 1x/yE1HcSFql2RxyX1c9tgKDRzzA52GeYSJxHOnG8ZJHzxOnYwq3ciYkZfCxwom0os82 SQ96BnmzQ683PnQngS42VpvVJVnjnNs2xe1W/FywqFIaGTb5TfwVZVDGz16Yerhz9ker t8+87IrY/QL79deqC44ZX8f2G4C6aWCYjMKWQy0j2aerhyFUNNQUc0LLks9Bt50urLDL LCixg1oGbPSsQJe+oooGnGb4rwyLNj0Gu2Cy7zN/DegAi0NQ4UHuN/hg07TEXrfIRZMF YA4Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=BE9aMgA59t92gtdA0TOVCIc3j2BnDsI64o5oYhL6cCE=; b=EjPO3a6YshsIKA9bZENHOB4UL0E3CRi3hsV2p8CnF2yxGL0Gy30I2bByRBOXgk0c+u y0AxwLyyYDEt92HPfWnCRg/br4+IFKLQ3opDOeViQCBdZln3VfALYzveBY1qDrNWPKjF q6cg+kdtp/2d6Mg68T7MGlR8nJ2TKgzRu0dA39U1UjU5kvISql78Dva50qgz6qo1CvcD bBPt4pfTgg7M5CCQxprk7Bpg5d0KTRdkJw9BWIHRVCrKOoS874QNrX73Ixga1x7ZBUn/ TB8j3FMvWVB6MkNQPEdZ6UvbhWKfFg/nKOwmDcqUehJTJJRByHWyR1Zr7td5BM0C5ECK IH8Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5328Z0prswtjzovjXO+x2o8fcz56Q55Enzr10NQBQ1E6U2/gWtjm 9/q6W+iNVo9DeOtjlhE8HkceMAD7WQODFgx1BOM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJywpeHLX8knuE2WLAHN9HBV0hocr2JfcgQ2zG1cA85lsukaNxRN9EWboMgnC5Dzxcly8O2xIzE6w+YrZtAkSZk=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:4089:: with SMTP id d9mr20524611ill.199.1608696899584; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:14:59 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201222112911.18004F40769@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20201222112911.18004F40769@rfc-editor.org>
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 23:14:48 -0500
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEHUBiUxF_stf8_VPOipy=vOmwtDMrLaCmEQTz9nF3ibGQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: Eastlake III Donald-LDE008 <Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com>, Erik Kline <ek.ietf@gmail.com>, "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com>, Olafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com>, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, me@kasparetter.com, IETF DNSEXT WG <dnsext@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsext/m-wfiZUA8isiCGo3svZ2MsZWX2M>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4343 (6361)
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 04:15:03 -0000
Hi, I am the author of RFC 4343. See below. On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 6:29 AM RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC4343, > "Domain Name System (DNS) Case Insensitivity Clarification". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6361 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Kaspar Etter <me@kasparetter.com> > > Section: 4.1 > > Original Text > ------------- > No "case conversion" or "case folding" is done during such output > operations, thus "preserving" case. > > Corrected Text > -------------- > ? > > Notes > ----- > Whose case is preserved? The case of the label in the DNS query or > the case of the label in the DNS database? The earlier text in Section 4.1 is intended to indicate it is the "database". > In other words, if there is a DNS record for ietf.org and I query > IETF.org, should the DNS response say ietf.org or IETF.org? I would > expect it's the former so that the DNS administrator can inform the > DNS requester about the preferred capitalization but I can't figure > this out on the basis of the RFC. Well, you seem to have figured out how it works, although I have no idea what why the reference to "DNS administrator" rather than DNS resolver or DNS server. > Does output case preservation refer to something else? All I observe > is that tools like dig return the latter when I run 'dig IETF.org'. Right. The deployed DNS generally conforms to this RFC. > Maybe an errata is not the right place to ask for clarification but > given the name of the RFC, I would expect to find a clear answer to > this question in the RFC. Well, I have no problem with the theory that any successor document to this RFC should be clearer on this point. > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. I'm not sure about the details of "errata" status but I think this should end up in the "hold for future documentation" or whatever the usual formula is. The RFC isn't wrong but is arguably unclear for some readers. Thanks, Donald ============================= Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com > -------------------------------------- > RFC4343 (draft-ietf-dnsext-insensitive-06) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Domain Name System (DNS) Case Insensitivity Clarification > Publication Date : January 2006 > Author(s) : D. Eastlake 3rd > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : DNS Extensions > Area : Internet > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG
- [dnsext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4343 (636… RFC Errata System
- Re: [dnsext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4343 … Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4343 … Kaspar Etter
- Re: [dnsext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4343 … Evan Hunt
- Re: [dnsext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4343 … Donald Eastlake