Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-https-05.txt

[Dick Franks <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, 24 May 2021 at 15:52, Ben Schwartz <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> For those who prefer Github's UI, I've posted Dick's diff to a branch commit in our repository [1].
Thanks

>
> The diff contains a number of editorial suggestions, such as removing use of ABNF, which we can consider separately.  The key substantive change, as discussed earlier in this thread, is to make comma-escape handling for value lists happen during character-string escape parsing, instead of afterward.
>
The ABNF defines the acceptable characters as a range of ASCII codes.
This ignores the inconvenient fact that zone files can be written
using some other non-ASCII codeset.
The character codes for 'a'...'z' will be different, and in the case
of EBCDIC not even contiguous.

The key substantive change is to make the draft conform to the
long-standing escape conventions enshrined in RFC1035.

> In the implementations I've worked on so far, this change would be highly inconvenient to implement, as it conditionally modifies the core character-string parsing loop that has thus far been entirely RR-type-independent and shared by all zone-file parsing contexts.
>
> The only way I can see to accommodate both of these implementation perspectives is to allow implementors to avoid the offending special case, which, as I've noted before, is not currently needed, and may never be needed.  I have proposed a change [2] that would add this option (now updated to avoid conditioning requirements on the IANA registry, in response to feedback from Paul Wouters).

For this to qualify as an issue sufficiently general to merit special
consideration in the spec, then it would need to be an insurmountable
obstacle encountered by every implementation.
BIND, NSD, PowerDNS, and Net::DNS are well able to deal with escapes
as described in RFC1035, all of them conspicuous counter-examples to
any argument that special treatment of double escapes is an essential
requirement.

Repeating the same fatuous argument ad nauseam will not make the issue go away.


--Dick



>
> --Ben
>
> [1] https://github.com/MikeBishop/dns-alt-svc/commit/5d3d651230de06adce10625d0dfb70ce8e938a39
> [2] https://github.com/MikeBishop/dns-alt-svc/pull/325/files
>
> On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 12:58 PM Dick Franks <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 22 May 2021 at 17:06, Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> >
>> > On May 22, 2021, at 1:58 AM, Dick Franks <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Please find attached the promised words to resolve the conflict
>> > > between current draft and RFC1035.
>> > >
>> > > This is presented as a context diff.
>> >
>> > Where do we find the original Markdown file so we can evaluate the diff?
>>
>> https://github.com/MikeBishop/dns-alt-svc
>>
>> --Dick
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> DNSOP mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop