Re: [DNSOP] The DNSOP WG has placed draft-song-dns-wireformat-http in state "Candidate for WG Adoption"

Bob Harold <rharolde@umich.edu> Tue, 05 July 2016 17:17 UTC

Return-Path: <rharolde@umich.edu>
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 1F8DD12D1AE for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 10:17:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=umich.edu
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 c16owrnpJIIV for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 10:17:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-x233.google.com (mail-yw0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::233]) (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 8112412D668 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 10:17:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw0-x233.google.com with SMTP id i12so66603249ywa.1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 10:17:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=umich.edu; s=google-2016-06-03; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=QybQz8Ek0c+7hqsV8glaaYXmTBMz2SHdv4POYv7SXCQ=; b=i1A8CCVp8spcxyN6Gp9EiWZUGcftfx54yLLPPTVPV4KjmeNJ7zO2qRRYJwXQAHVr+K bf5cdT19vIWUtklyY/DlvQF+ZwvvZk2rfnvl+K8MKytOeOUkbvuRxLdfCZ1J7nTyCtv1 JNf/wZMMptH5db/cSaaRPbBY2c5XzgV98MAzHQaM46EWBAYGuAWEHtrkn6C31EfJHIxA VyALoQ0flIHWNQFX0PRmsm1CXaJxbz0U6p8cPPT5Q4FQow0Mu8fw6GUN+fxDTIq1N8ml yn6QZkR7AtXriufx4D0CP+/P8f/ZXqBHhgpSobQDZuaczHbBJqCeGPLmB+m6IV4o4o7P DsBg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QybQz8Ek0c+7hqsV8glaaYXmTBMz2SHdv4POYv7SXCQ=; b=Up8Xq8lts7d68GQhBjJVSjeb/qABPtbYbwNSnA2LjGDqpv8v3aB7nJGxhmeolvHojV 3EQeXzv+KkYfUpAuqOtZtPFEjkhp2VaH2mFgY4dPRs8EvehD2CqovqfxyCe2qkK+r3h3 MoN17s0LtVjiefsYSaLBg+WJFbgANYr4R0fGdXo9ml56vVNFo7FDlNOHz/8kZIk1N9EQ c4Gy1SGqRVdBGG+CHXSdWAiciMoVjpjzixbVwOMfKXL8N9EkM7DmCY05OBY2NzZUHc8y PpqPRj2/AFZpc9SqmsSgWsuVAPfW4h0ollTe6oXbCyRCVLX69kkS69QEf5Xv7pQESxmS SKAA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJ1Ry4fNWOmSLv/eLB0iXM+SUsdyK22rRqLJY+ARTvooDSiaypt/cQ8ldTprlpgqkDkO1MhVgdP46hdiW5n
X-Received: by 10.13.217.75 with SMTP id b72mr11820139ywe.44.1467739024638; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 10:17:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.129.91.198 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 10:17:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20160701075146.24565.47571.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <20160701075146.24565.47571.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Bob Harold <rharolde@umich.edu>
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 13:17:03 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+nkc8BpYkZDzKHnkUSTXfCJYGp8gH8g7venFkHujCs8hV91Qw@mail.gmail.com>
To: IETF Secretariat <ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114fb2682ff5810536e69fd8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/8z2u-E_pRZdsZVs3T9R5gU_kRfU>
Cc: draft-song-dns-wireformat-http@ietf.org, dnsop-chairs@ietf.org, IETF DNSOP WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] The DNSOP WG has placed draft-song-dns-wireformat-http in state "Candidate for WG Adoption"
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, 05 Jul 2016 17:17:08 -0000

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:51 AM, IETF Secretariat <
ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org> wrote:

>
> The DNSOP WG has placed draft-song-dns-wireformat-http in state
> Candidate for WG Adoption (entered by Tim Wicinski)
>
> The document is available at
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-song-dns-wireformat-http/
>
>
> I support adoption and will review.

Is there a need to mention a third scenario?

Scenario 1:
stub resolver <--- dns or http(s) ---> DNS resolver

Scenario 2:
stub resolver <--- dns ---> proxy DNS to HTTP(S) <--- http(s) ---> DNS
resolver

Scenario 3:
stub resolver <--- http(s) ---> proxy HTTP(S) to DNS <--- dns ---> DNS
resolver

Or is the third a subset of another or implied or not useful?
Some comment on this scenario might be helpful.

-- 
Bob Harold