Re: [DNSOP] data at delegation points

Ralf Weber <dns@fl1ger.de> Tue, 14 April 2020 15:57 UTC

Return-Path: <dns@fl1ger.de>
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 1F7A33A0A11 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 08:57:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 XNkNMfsDbU5c for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 08:57:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.guxx.net (smtp.guxx.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:a0:322c::25:42]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E13643A09F6 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 08:57:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by nyx.guxx.net (Postfix, from userid 107) id 880315F40703; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 15:57:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.2.128] (p54B8A2E9.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.184.162.233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by nyx.guxx.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6C2CC5F40302; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 15:57:37 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Ralf Weber" <dns@fl1ger.de>
To: "Paul Vixie" <paul@redbarn.org>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 17:57:36 +0200
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5671)
Message-ID: <DE1C0DEF-0479-4AF9-9D31-AEE2ADA67C46@fl1ger.de>
In-Reply-To: <060513e7-742d-6de9-cf16-c367fbb13845@redbarn.org>
References: <060513e7-742d-6de9-cf16-c367fbb13845@redbarn.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/1UoEErfUUopJp8tmGBaBMxovAus>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] data at delegation points
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: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 15:57:51 -0000

Moin!

On 14 Apr 2020, at 17:43, Paul Vixie wrote:
> DS should never have been placed at the delegation point, and has led 
> to a decade or longer of bugs and corner cases and complexity. it 
> ought to have been a nephew domain of the delegation point, but, in 
> the parent:
>
> so instead of example.com DS, it should have been example._dnssec.com 
> DS.
Just to clarify if I understand that correct. The DS for example.net 
would be example._dnssec.net DS. Correct? So would you propose to do 
example._ns2.net NS2 to distinguish parent and child NS2 records?

So long
-Ralf
—--
Ralf Weber