Re: [DNSOP] Please review the definitions around "recursive" in terminology-bis

"Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Mon, 12 March 2018 17:39 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
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 7DE62126BFD for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 10:39:57 -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] 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 bpXEiItC1Gho for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 10:39:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4700126579 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 10:39:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.32.60.132] (50-1-51-141.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.141]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w2CHdO4X053853 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 12 Mar 2018 10:39:25 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-51-141.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.141] claimed to be [10.32.60.132]
From: "Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
To: Vix <paul@redbarn.org>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 10:39:54 -0700
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.10r5443)
Message-ID: <4C7FAA4B-88DC-4A20-95CA-479FF27B3516@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <0BCEBFC2-D933-4539-9604-2479E3FB16CD@redbarn.org>
References: <5495D079-93C8-4A61-9329-DBB3AD3D2B67@vpnc.org> <0BCEBFC2-D933-4539-9604-2479E3FB16CD@redbarn.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/1pS5ELuAGhf6kC3T8wIPmM4ebz0>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Please review the definitions around "recursive" in terminology-bis
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 12 Mar 2018 17:39:57 -0000

On 12 Mar 2018, at 10:21, Vix wrote:

> I call them full resolved not recursive resolvers. I thought 1034 also 
> did.

Not really. Please see the full text of Section 6 to see the state of 
"full resolver" and "full-service resolver".

The term "recursive resolver" is used in a zillion other places, so 
defining it here will help readers understand the DNS.

--Paul Hoffman