IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Second Working Group Last Call - draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Tue, 20 December 2016 15:29 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 2258F1299DF for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 07:29:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 aZPjO6atnzGq for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 07:29:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:2a03:6000:1004:1::68]) (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 4CDFB129A78 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 07:29:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3tjhXX35ZXzDD7; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 16:29:16 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1482247756; bh=GJ+pddratvNgt3bxDz6uqMJtszkEl7Xj/Ox6fy5xpOE=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=jiXeMHSzOLmWuBWix8wIl5ongXEqsQLhYnTFOlh8wDU2Z2s4G7t5ohBFRRQS7VlY8 5EkUGO+DH78MHGQLIOUqS7pOOtTcA2kRZo65d9tX5VLkocOZYhezdE0Q9I1ikQk/Ws kGkhFKWdyOqHYS96x1y5VcCxKDiwma8Cgu8nVp9Q=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TQ0tYG_5KByh; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 16:29:15 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (206-248-139-105.dsl.teksavvy.com [206.248.139.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 16:29:15 +0100 (CET)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2D7EB923; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 10:29:14 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 bofh.nohats.ca 2D7EB923
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24A804150155; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 10:29:14 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 10:29:13 -0500
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
In-Reply-To: <20161220152210.he6tuxo3qh6myatw@nic.fr>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.20.1612201028370.10842@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <CADyWQ+EJ0LO=pU-yUdEHwC3aP5KdXxsnD9kEvmmTeAoe0BxK3A@mail.gmail.com> <CAHw9_i+uwq9ofZ6hdG7Ngyz4s23F0XgiMSzazwFKw7DiTcEFDQ@mail.gmail.com> <20161220105915.xkrk5h57lqqfbsl2@nic.fr> <alpine.LRH.2.20.1612201013280.10842@bofh.nohats.ca> <20161220152210.he6tuxo3qh6myatw@nic.fr>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (LRH 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/2s_7OU2udABTHnUpxHXL5de3qH8>
Cc: tjw ietf <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Second Working Group Last Call - draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse
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: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 15:29:23 -0000

On Tue, 20 Dec 2016, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

>>> One of my comments was not addressed. I would like, in section 10, see
>>> some details about what exactly is implemented by Unbound and Google
>>> Public DNS:
>>>
>>> * synthesis of NXDOMAIN from NSEC (obviously; that's the minimum)
>>> * synthesis of NXDOMAIN from NSEC3 (if no opt-out)
>>> * synthesis of NODATA from NSEC/NSEC3
>>> * synthesis of positive answers from wilcards+NSEC
>>> * all of them?
>>
>> Do you mean this in the context of RFC 6982?
>
> No, RFC 7942.
>
>> Or do you believe this needs to go into the RFC?
>
> Certainly not.

Ok, we are talking about the same and are in agreement :)

Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email