Re: [DNSOP] WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-zoneversion

Miek Gieben <> Thu, 27 April 2023 19:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2164AC1519A9 for <>; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 12:26:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PfsRt_MmH_im for <>; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 12:26:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B00A8C14CF1E for <>; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 12:26:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-504dfc87927so15097591a12.0 for <>; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 12:26:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20221208; t=1682623573; x=1685215573; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :mail-followup-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=WxWVFloMAXbAemG7TWwRnsSUcZyUk7RhQ/DUT8M66U8=; b=w1KIxEhRgaoQdi8Hzkgl9vVV8TAyKLnbAX9MnFYO1GHJlAu/TjsX8VJeidfFHeUUUA 4YZ4FrmgHOtd9g5Pn6mXT3QYtNmlijUrYkRBTXEVO85Hg2vm0k5GmYVnzpyHU+LnQ8lM FZus3xqcpXClvrVBk5uV5LOsz47yxzMvRhYd0dppSNuijHyOdrTRac+al0j9iPLJyzU/ EL04/ZHR7Vui9rOj4mpNtVTJiyPQb4+056D8YDugCBEbRaLCaoozC/tIESiF1SmbNDSy HE4OH8qfc6Ub6i+EPBvtMDlQYzrZ6e1V4PIWz2kZb4pZZj5XtxqX9t5xrG+o1qQplFSD Fu2Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20221208; t=1682623573; x=1685215573; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :mail-followup-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=WxWVFloMAXbAemG7TWwRnsSUcZyUk7RhQ/DUT8M66U8=; b=eZBuSpBPni6aRmZcGf21azkuqn0Q2OnK6C9JPzIBcoihf6wlkZasq3M3ccm4pNSAU1 5Vcs3dZFOxVHACLDReEZ9TNfvuWKHOG5xocsYf0V4Mm6gmBuMHwBR5mHkePzf8tcG1MC 3f1CU43V8ycge+pvdoMxUY66narZc8Id5luqJ5kb82HVXYQAthDhWqteEZb1cTjFgIy4 mvmqpnBvHZQpC8KksM8tQf0WHMu+RJhymD1sm4gODe8WHof91ArA9NwUlkbQxCj4Harz Y7X0xYX7yBUky/CSa/IPuGuU1tdSPeaNkAGun/30ETixd348SoAsu0uR0frBJNdCpHPD lk7A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDwTiubR7G0EbUU5YrBwtwS7CvIpwzWSii1cpxg7/bibsN5xylYT uEg543lHmH8gxrWya6c9iqjoe4uUypMpaQKo9n8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ5KcWdU/PY8P3OEVjlStkBr9Z9vXagzAIcw0MrAVH9/6Ppd2p9VnMWlgl3rsJ8EV+amr4ruYw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:3d91:b0:960:6489:b2ff with SMTP id he17-20020a1709073d9100b009606489b2ffmr2677655ejc.31.1682623573594; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 12:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([2a10:3781:2dc2:1:ceb4:7267:fc9f:1809]) by with ESMTPSA id l13-20020a170906230d00b0094f2f1c5ea1sm10280199eja.174.2023. (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 27 Apr 2023 12:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2023 21:26:07 +0200
From: Miek Gieben <>
To: John Levine <>
Message-ID: <>
Mail-Followup-To: John Levine <>,
References: <> <20230427152354.28E05C679F73@ary.qy>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230427152354.28E05C679F73@ary.qy>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-zoneversion
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2023 19:26:17 -0000

[ Quoting <> in "Re: [DNSOP] WGLC for draft-ietf-dns..." ]
>It appears that Suzanne Woolf  <> said:
>>This email begins a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-zoneversion-02 (
>>If you've reviewed this document and think it's ready for publication, please let us and the WG know, by responding on-list to this message. We particularly need to hear
>>from implementers and operators whether this EDNS option is implementable and useful.
>>If you don't think it's ready, and have specific concerns or suggestions, please let us know about those too.
>Since it's a year old, has anyone implemented it beyond the one server listed in the draft?
>I think it's an interesting idea but I also don't want to spend time on it if it's just going to be filed and forgotten.

I looked into this for

The option is trivial to implemented (in an auth server). I.e. seems similar to NSID.

"Resolver and forwarder behavior is undefined" is too weak IMO, and should point to the
hop-by-hop nature for EDNS0 options, are explicitly say what's expected here wrt to this


Miek Gieben