Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-02.txt

[Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]>]

On Jun 14, 2015, at 10:05 AM, John Dickinson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Typo: I think you mean parent-side not parent-size.

"No, I'm sorry, you can't have a big NS record like that until you're older and have had kids of your own."

Fixed.

> A few other things that have confused me in the past:
> 
> In-bailiwick: Informal discussion (in the bar at IETF meetings) suggests to me that most people are confused by this term. To me and about 50% of the people I have asked it means "Data for which the server is authoritative and *not* data for which the server is an authoritative ancestor". To me that is more in keeping with the dictionary definition of bailiwick. However, at least 50% of people in the bar felt differently. IMHO I think this is a term that should be deprecated and replaced by "in zone" or "in domain".

We don't get to deprecate commonly-used terms in this document, unfortunately. In the -bis document, we might make a run at that, or at least in saying "if this term confuses you, use X instead". 

> Some RR types are described as "class independent" (See RFC4034) I am not sure of the exact meaning of this (despite Roy's attempts to educate me) and would like to see it defined here.

Good call. Proposed addition:

Class independent: A resource record type whose syntax and semantics are the same for every DNS class. A resource record type that is not class independent has different meanings depending on the DNS class of the record, or the meaning is undefined for classes other than IN.

> Also mention of A-Label, U-Label any other IDN terminology might be useful.

Good call. "A-label" and "U-label" are sometimes bandied about without reference to IDNA, so it would be good to at least add them to the "IDN" entry in this document.

--Paul Hoffman