IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-yao-dnsop-accompanying-questions-00.txt

Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk> Fri, 29 April 2016 09:38 UTC

Return-Path: <ray@bellis.me.uk>
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 DAEC912D09B for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 02:38:41 -0700 (PDT)
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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 s7zeLEDKSrym for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 02:38:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hydrogen.portfast.net (hydrogen.portfast.net [188.246.200.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBC5D12D097 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 02:38:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [46.227.151.81] (port=51804 helo=rays-mbp.local) by hydrogen.portfast.net ([188.246.200.2]:465) with esmtpsa (fixed_plain:ray@bellis.me.uk) (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) id 1aw4se-0004Eb-E1 (Exim 4.72) (return-path <ray@bellis.me.uk>); Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:38:36 +0100
To: draft-yao-dnsop-accompanying-questions@tools.ietf.org
References: <20160429090023503461119@cnnic.cn>
From: Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>
Message-ID: <57232B9B.7060608@bellis.me.uk>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:38:35 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160429090023503461119@cnnic.cn>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/0BAVna3wdTuh2_4pqiji5Ud3V1s>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-yao-dnsop-accompanying-questions-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 09:38:42 -0000


On 29/04/2016 02:01, Jiankang Yao wrote:
> Dear all,
>  
>       We submit a draft about "A DNS Query including A Main Question
> with Accompanying Questions".
>  
>        Any comments are welcome.

I am unconvinced that the ability to specify multiple QNAMEs offers any
benefits and can't think of any good use cases where the client knows a
priori what the other QNAMEs might be.   [ I don't consider looking up
example.com and www.example.com at the same time to be 'good' ].

The examples given all appear to show a recursor -> authority query, but
I see no hint in the draft about whether it's only for that path or also
for stub -> recursor.

My own draft in this area (draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes) where only
a single QNAME is supported and a single RCODE is returned has IMHO far
clearer semantics.  It's also appropriate both for stub -> recursor and
for recursor -> authority.

Ray

p.s. I noticed a dangling reference to RFC1321 (MD5) ?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email