Re: [DNSOP] Definition of QNAME (Was: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-06.txt

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Thu, 21 September 2017 13:31 UTC

Return-Path: <dot@dotat.at>
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 6FED3134AA7 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 06:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 m6TbfuHukjlk for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 06:31:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ppsw-32.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-32.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.132]) (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 C01021320CF for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 06:31:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://help.uis.cam.ac.uk/email-scanner-virus
Received: from grey.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.57.57]:33108) by ppsw-32.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.136]:25) with esmtps (TLSv1:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) id 1dv1ZO-000Fu7-1k (Exim 4.89) (return-path <dot@dotat.at>); Thu, 21 Sep 2017 14:31:10 +0100
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 14:31:10 +0100
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
To: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
cc: Shumon Huque <shuque@gmail.com>, dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
In-Reply-To: <799422B9-F267-4227-8895-7620AAFDB901@rfc1035.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1709211430040.2486@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <149894524329.526.18431408698564464455@ietfa.amsl.com> <20170824142147.lshdlmjv62nojd32@nic.fr> <20170921034533.d2isi2idl7cyepea@mx4.yitter.info> <CAHPuVdVc39kGZc1Kd-RsN=McWmoKLA5=AQPCJbCVkYxhTAAo6g@mail.gmail.com> <799422B9-F267-4227-8895-7620AAFDB901@rfc1035.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/4q27wjlHtd4Ov8cYtAsHvgwiNBA>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Definition of QNAME (Was: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-06.txt
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, 21 Sep 2017 13:31:15 -0000

Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> wrote:
>
> Maybe the definition of QNAME (effective) needs to be extended to
> include the result of NAPTR record processing? Says he running away
> quickly...

As I understand it, NAPTR processing happens in applications outside the
DNS so the result is a QNAME (original) from the DNS point of view.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/  -  I xn--zr8h punycode
Southeast Iceland: Southeasterly 5 or 6. Moderate. Showers. Good.