IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] New Version Notification for draft-ah-dnsext-rfc1995bis-ixfr-02

Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Fri, 19 August 2011 22:51 UTC

Return-Path: <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
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 8728C21F8BC4 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:51:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.857
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.857 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.912, BAYES_20=-0.74, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265]
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 tIh6jgJ0f36p for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:51:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id BFC8E21F8BC5 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 15:51:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 46828 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2011 22:53:55 -0000
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 19 Aug 2011 22:53:55 -0000
Message-ID: <4E4EE8C5.10607@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 07:50:45 +0900
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ondrej.sury@nic.cz
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> <4DFC9C20.4030401@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <BANLkTimhLJfsmMe3AE34yLrOQ+zyZPBdgQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E000B93.3030306@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <8A34D894-4323-4948-811E-6568C838A503@nic.cz> <4E4D7E7E.1070700@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <80B25AE0-4DB6-4DBB-866B-4DB8F59D6DA0@nic.cz> <4E4E1576.7020803@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <3F00A878-2637-4DC2-8180-ECD293A82966@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <3F00A878-2637-4DC2-8180-ECD293A82966@nic.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] 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: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 22:51:21 -0000

Ondej Sur wrote:

>>> The IXFR-only is a simple solution to remedy this problem.
>>
>> It is not.

> Then I would say that we cannot come to agreement and it seems to
> be pointless to continue the discussion.

It is simply impossible to make protocols fool proof against
severe operational errors such as disk journal corruption.

Attempts to do so will result in complicated protocols with
a lot more operational problems.

If you can't admit so, there can be no agreement, of course.

						Masataka Ohta

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email