IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Implementations of extended error?

Dick Franks <rwfranks@gmail.com> Mon, 04 February 2019 12:07 UTC

Return-Path: <rwfranks@gmail.com>
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 ACE82130E6D for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 04:07:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 Qc6Ww6sFbMwm for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 04:07:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-it1-x12d.google.com (mail-it1-x12d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98535130E62 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 04:07:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-it1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id m62so20415174ith.5 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 04:07:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=WEPyIQiiY0e+o/nff0a3xhPMNKf8+Bj98rfBWByZdw4=; b=utmgjO7G0Le3tzxfv28WR7J+y0zu0DUIeR/QccPUroEtEjgckORyeQqeXz5qLzZP8W veG0cjau3x8y5xoUA9o1Zj0fjnVrLMnZhL6pUcOi2tjVx4GZTPLdGpdTcFPU48inFc9X fdPjt0phhMZg8tLfalzQljPErJx45akn0xm1Rjpb07yp2oB5o/AJh3WgY9jKAml+Bypy YZWZ47tIvkjROanxdl2lNMa1+ZoMg1GsRxe27Sq9/cEPux6zII+Z6P79nl3zrWCY+owS qpkxHQGfbQrhYL5xCvjXVYkIORUTp7V0rOXomX8c3jEsS3AnNQb9RJjtVNOg9TuOxr88 lYvA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=WEPyIQiiY0e+o/nff0a3xhPMNKf8+Bj98rfBWByZdw4=; b=uHBU9ZI6PHDiUj7qNcaJ9FN2+o1PvY5kI+21mtBu/1bIGFwU4CDEL55c3qLtHEB67b leTjeNK8TYzUxLzwI/f6ls17SkoKPN/HnwUFQKTAPNpDeZRtjNAOyLJBhhmfgnmO2iN7 6qeGAnXKqcb44bK9Q4OPyeECMQIlhUjgM5mCZ+hPjEiPZGVDmP7GuYpW/mK/CrIxEIt+ 4Q6enTmv4fdpkzwm8e4QNhNwbxCunDEdTXZW0mZrUDbEys8ji+cOMS7xYpyo02rbDQpC gvi/08AK85Y1TNLaae2sghFrm8V1vqCGK/C2A9XptIosee3TFEMN7VRbfn0un21uSHom jcXQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAub2bhywZ/8SAnK9YEF2Tt+Og2hDHzRo4TzM9ixAP+I1ylj8Ffid o9VmZB/H5UW3A1+SV+adUnIxZ/CbHM0ESZuDZ7OzTQ8k
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IZ9OgNXzzoyMalPRU3cVJFgmOKElMPpzNHzdzcKWsTkum1HivuNee8V/ijdI6P69u2EdJA7XF0wk/g+9WRBzpQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:7b0e:: with SMTP id q14mr7435261itc.82.1549282030911; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 04:07:10 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <ybl5zu3qurr.fsf@w7.hardakers.net>
In-Reply-To: <ybl5zu3qurr.fsf@w7.hardakers.net>
From: Dick Franks <rwfranks@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 12:06:34 +0000
Message-ID: <CAKW6Ri6fnejevDcaXkCnyQRpeRuQabb-qjahjzwmz5Y2hNBchQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
Cc: IETF DNSOP WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001c071d05811055e3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/-ePeKDvSrwUshRvRkV-RG51SEsE>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Implementations of extended error?
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: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 12:07:18 -0000

There is not yet a proper IANA allocated option code for this.

Might I suggest that all interested parties settle on 65015 from the
local/experimental block until the real thing arrives.


Dick Franks
________________________



On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 at 17:33, Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net> wrote:

>
> Folks,
>
> We (some definite of we, possibly including you) are curious who is
> planning (or has already) implemented the Extended Error EDNS0 extension
> [1]?
> As DNSOP is preferring RFCs that have been implemented already, it would
> be good to know what plans exist or have been completed.
>
> [1]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-extended-error/
>
> --
> Wes Hardaker
> USC/ISI
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email