Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-huston-kskroll-sentinel-04.txt

On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 8:01 AM, Robert Story <rstory@isi.edu> wrote:
> On Mon 2017-11-13 18:26:02-0800 internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>> directories. This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System
>> Operations WG of the IETF.
>
> I was re-reading the draft today and noticed that Vold and Vnew are
> inconsistent with Vold and Vnew with respect to non-SERVFAIL responses:
>
>>  o  Vleg: A DNSSEC-Validating resolver that does not implement this
>>     mechanism will respond with an A or AAAA RRSET response for "_is-
>>     ta", an A record response for "_not-ta" and SERVFAIL for the
>>     invalid name.
>
> Shouldn't it be "an A or AAAA RRSET" for "_not-ta"?
>
>>  o  nonV: A non-DNSSEC-Validating resolver will respond with an A
>>     record response for "_is-ta", an A record response for "_not-ta"
>>     and an A record response for the invalid name.
>
> Similarly, shouldn't all three of these be "an A or AAAA record"?
>
> The table following this text also only specifies "A" for responses.

Yes, you are right -- for all places where there is 'A' it should be
'A or AAAA'; how do people feel about something along the lines of:

"Throughout this document, we are using A to refer to an Address
record (either 'A' or  'AAAA') " -- having "A or AAAA" scattered all
over the document makes it now flow as nicely...

W

>
> --
> Robert Story <http://www.isi.edu/~rstory>
> USC Information Sciences Institute <http://www.isi.edu/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>

-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf