IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-wkumari-dnsop-extended-error

Roy Arends <roy@dnss.ec> Thu, 27 July 2017 10:34 UTC

Return-Path: <roy@dnss.ec>
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 B2C531318A3 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 03:34:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dnss.ec
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 3ayS8oyRGc8z for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 03:34:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22d.google.com (mail-wm0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B69CA1318A2 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 03:34:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id c184so103256527wmd.0 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 03:34:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dnss.ec; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references :to; bh=sSSqNrlSh+gw3Wn5xfEUFHxe1DD0uIsnvK6/5gjMasI=; b=L2pJizjoRPUpYoAfLFgeESRkHTzhPK+G6WSpkOUgPoy8HgOhmtrNvhvHrz2y2UKAGJ Ccd3sQtsM/6zNMUzvpyyvxlEWo6u1wQV8k/K9Rr02XaHDqK21NWzgJc8CMC6mk6sLQhL fOrNy4g5IH8fl9fZB8OPOF0fiGXCadeekxdKk=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=sSSqNrlSh+gw3Wn5xfEUFHxe1DD0uIsnvK6/5gjMasI=; b=OAfVsqoxNI/NES3AVeeOKq5NcyAQWMvhQ0nuDa1u4xYwh472jk3vjSjFeconAE2Dji Gx2qIwBwDnV/0stn3df1Q7XJFe+kmSjwAdACymaGAtFgqpbMJvfdwMLTcinJyFRaMds3 mBIfjn+lGAw1mhBZv6e1BKrH2wtcQbhwYwUtsCPbDGVezSksyJmbDpzgFntxXM99PSTl Aqe/RdnIf6bt7vRRzNVZe72SaZMHKT8Rk6xBMG6BSilMx+YURXZVoPynfMox3XqeOrWx WKkFYeV0qzOMteZg7Hal5ff/QAvm3ZVRvc0OBpJ1WIaMVYvbmfWuNqjKHJVJ0BJkrUIn zdXQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw1116VK6tiBWqepYRQ6YKRsdReewx+wjzwwVheIOPAAj7OZi7SrIx 5wTYIy1JBBkStBLc
X-Received: by 10.28.126.193 with SMTP id z184mr3033413wmc.46.1501151662046; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 03:34:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.82] (host109-148-53-126.range109-148.btcentralplus.com. [109.148.53.126]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t14sm19896868wra.44.2017.07.27.03.34.20 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 27 Jul 2017 03:34:20 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A8549C04-2BA3-4CC1-B5AE-F3F60F878FB4"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Roy Arends <roy@dnss.ec>
In-Reply-To: <20170727080827.365d64bf@earth.zonnestelsel.tk>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 11:34:20 +0100
Cc: tjw ietf <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <4DD39053-3E33-4BD1-A83D-F81219484519@dnss.ec>
References: <CADyWQ+Ffu8JOn6co184PC-Uvv4G1qYU3d0ZchupRJEDDmfYKaw@mail.gmail.com> <20170727080827.365d64bf@earth.zonnestelsel.tk>
To: Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/3lGcTc-aemwKe3npRjKn7Qs8hBA>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-wkumari-dnsop-extended-error
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: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 10:34:26 -0000

> On 27 Jul 2017, at 09:08, Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org> wrote:
> 
> I support the draft, and am willing to contribute text and review!
> 
> I have a few points now, in fact:
> 
> 1. Does it make sense to divide the response codes up into those
>   corresponding to each error type? That is, something like 1xxxx for
>   SERVFAIL, 2xxxx for FORMERR, and so on?

Loving this idea. 3xxxx for REFUSED.

> 2. Do we mind having lots of error codes? For example, we can go really
>   far and do things likes DNSERR_BADCOMPRESS "name compression used
>   in RRTYPE that forbids it", or DNSERR_NAMETOOLONG "name longer than
>   255 bytes", and so on. We could end up with hundreds of error codes.
>   As a developer I don't mind this too much, as these provide hints
>   about stuff you should be considering, but I can see why some people
>   would prefer to keep it simple.

Really like this as well. I think it is really helpful.
> 
> 3. As a concrete proposal, I suggest DNSERR_CENSORED, with the code 451
>   for consistency with the HTTP response code. This may be a useful
>   addition to the RPZ draft. ;)

Sure.

Roy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email