Re: [DNSOP] RFC 8482 (the ANY -> HINFO hack) and DNAME

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Tue, 19 November 2019 00:53 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28992120143 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 16:53:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 riD3FSatbMEi for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 16:53:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [IPv6:2001:559:8000:cd::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70B9A12012C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 16:53:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.19.0.136] (unknown [75.104.91.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8C077B0588; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 00:53:49 +0000 (UTC)
To: dnsop@ietf.org, Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
References: <20191116144152.0AB3DF61257@ary.iecc.com> <069FA704-BC4C-4777-B812-E161993F22AB@dukhovni.org> <A3FED43A-8C8B-432D-A1D1-6710B07643D0@isc.org> <BCEB457E-98BB-4B5E-82EB-B552BB8C7DD6@dukhovni.org> <98d63176-a61f-4ecc-92d1-887ef2189eeb@redbarn.org> <B935C153-B91D-4683-84B6-78F8DFBEA66E@dukhovni.org>
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
Message-ID: <9aa4296c-58f8-5464-87f3-d5dc2b06fa96@redbarn.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 16:53:45 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/7.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <B935C153-B91D-4683-84B6-78F8DFBEA66E@dukhovni.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/-Q_uBMa-HUFH-GF3C4tzSJth3vY>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] RFC 8482 (the ANY -> HINFO hack) and DNAME
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 00:53:57 -0000


Viktor Dukhovni wrote on 2019-11-18 12:56:> ...
> 
> At the end of the day, operating outside the RFC carries some risk,
> and one should not be cavalier in deploying creative deviations from
> the spec.  However, post-MX CNAME indirection is seen to useful by
> some to stick to the spec, and since MTAs tolerate this, it is used
> in the wild.

a lot of things happen in the wild. that's why we call it "the wild".

every protocol recommendation should be thought of as rebuilding the 
airplane during flight -- to be done with utmost caution. "just do 
whatever mostly works" is in no way cautious.

-- 
P Vixie