IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] Draft of an RRTYPE extension language

"John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> Fri, 19 August 2011 21:59 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.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 2469421F8B27 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:59:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 MNwFUER4qenZ for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:59:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E6CC21F86AC for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:59:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 34241 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2011 21:59:56 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:vbr-info:user-agent:cleverness; s=85c0.4e4edcdc.k1108; bh=2gUQKHlb778H5w0GG8JFy8rx8zetT8bVbzEueXSI5cE=; b=hQEVAfdXNZAagWtYOu3iJ/7tbm6bqQ0NX+WctAdqVHOFbzM95K1DXk7Bym8N2Ghjb09bUxs/JqODCCnZ0xx6FoAOS9XgTiNmqCBI91FaMx40FAB27ACvFcZy8OR3No3oj+YAbd2e4xLdoTElUYrKUSuWC651+CRzAVOq/1LPGRw=
VBR-Info: md=iecc.com; mc=all; mv=dwl.spamhaus.org
Received: (ofmipd 127.0.0.1) with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 19 Aug 2011 21:59:34 -0000
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 17:59:56 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1108191758460.55875@joyce.lan>
From: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
To: Ben Clifford <benc@hawaga.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <530A0726-D5A6-43FA-9B15-AFB80DFF5B38@hawaga.org.uk>
References: <20110819050440.21024.qmail@joyce.lan> <63366D5A116E514AA4A9872D3C533539570853015F@QEO40072.de.t-online.corp> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1108191103590.84363@joyce.lan> <530A0726-D5A6-43FA-9B15-AFB80DFF5B38@hawaga.org.uk>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
Cleverness: None detected
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Cc: "dnsext@ietf.org" <dnsext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Draft of an RRTYPE extension language
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: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 21:59:12 -0000

>> You can't enforce that -- even if the target is OK now, someone might change it later, and if I'm editing records in a provisioning system, I might enter the SRV record before the A records it points to.
>
> If this draft is aimed squarely at provisioning systems, then the compression and additional record processing flags are irrelevant. (If its aimed more to "encapsulate the machine usable pieces of the defining RFC, whatever that machine may be", then not so...)

My plan, which I think is expressed reasonably clearly in the draft, is 
that it's also aimed at authoritative server software, so they can handle 
new RRTYPEs without code changes and without having to sneak them in via 
hex escape codes.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email