IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Another attempt at consensus on the bailiwick discussion

Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com> Thu, 16 December 2021 18:45 UTC

Return-Path: <bemasc@google.com>
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 C9D793A0DBE for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:45:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com
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 LdMY30ZPgmFY for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:45:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ua1-x92a.google.com (mail-ua1-x92a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::92a]) (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 7E9893A0DC1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:45:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ua1-x92a.google.com with SMTP id i6so48795266uae.6 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:45:30 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=MbDhIN9HXkwzB2n07wXqvPmbk45FvWpCMz6WSYe2MhU=; b=cKx2Ir/cm7AopdXpRdkPqNwx5fcFruplCwJnZlke/5IWmv3fBBI6gTDEBvyA3dLWt2 M00EpzjUzeaXVcxIiiazL2ljOwQY8p9Kfs5hqXnfiOV1o+FTpZ7MgKuYj4T7+nriw6f/ kYRLWcuaI8EQ/uSkvxC/tSpeKprm0m5xYp4rG8tmTXBYpVpTlzp53U0fM/sVPjY8xFfp nWq2UOX8FZZO6j4eX8dqUNQPJvKYKUDWpwwhznB2PW6CzReO37C+bky8pCOsQRYA3f80 VAFd1uESVMTvrItzMPqyD1dhHYxBOAHQsB21QcZeVUG+VF52XcoisLiNMWO/71od2OhP VX0Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MbDhIN9HXkwzB2n07wXqvPmbk45FvWpCMz6WSYe2MhU=; b=Z15A7m5Dixp4gN3EecnV33OF74T9nvol19oA1nTfLGHF4+HE0OBiJFpnTA0Bu8RvDp TuZd9roLiXchXOMuL41WbSLkLZYduMcT+HfwWxcnj+VMgDJkh0sZhCGxzFRNRkri64DB zJ/vds4r7zTeeJ09zGiayXegLdfuNokz4JR39gIUMA3mXuIqF83FyNxJ04s8YO4Nl39C NORzR2kpLOrGNDrdnuQpR8okAhnPlOaaBkz5865dX1GmiA7KYF81wRrkHPZr22Li2gL6 znPDKWAtL14z6pzvir7fne6/pc603243EJcCZAANGOqfLXkHqdywytt+VFoQ9BC5dBvj 3BVw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532EcU/w1LdsPRgVsZZ9Db+18YsWaSTsUJ+bLu6OjEuG7FmN5VR9 MNmOUhyXfdpTl0YpBMKfdLm/bQfSr9fSYrwEpHPTGwgTr8g=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzDY34olwasL+gbQkSRxSwC491ICy+fB8xLaPJg973zAcw7OeA5FvV1zcZFwrHz92XuDQN5x2QlKRzkPYc/U74=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:2859:: with SMTP id az25mr6329983vsb.25.1639680328008; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:45:28 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <B08E9361-B97B-4862-861C-4EF628C85E50@icann.org> <bb61304c-6ef9-7850-3dbb-19b624bc07b@nohats.ca> <60a11d97-8be4-91e-4880-999c1a57a75b@dotat.at> <FC138247-7BA2-4CCA-8E6C-A06423236A81@icann.org> <2009A9A9-4CF3-4AB6-8D6B-3474B15F0328@verisign.com> <CAHbrMsDpW=Z7R69Zn9Oqxfjo7SnhfuNpj_uL+VN6FS_5oXuA5g@mail.gmail.com> <315888CA-4429-4038-AB6F-0D38B95A2FA2@verisign.com>
In-Reply-To: <315888CA-4429-4038-AB6F-0D38B95A2FA2@verisign.com>
From: Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:45:17 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHbrMsBj1F9rtFywZh-68JjCTUVOzAej_GLc15KGNOALQf28yg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Wessels, Duane" <dwessels=40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007f5bed05d347d35e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/9lwWs1J738BD5b4euQrmIareIzg>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Another attempt at consensus on the bailiwick discussion
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 16 Dec 2021 18:45:35 -0000

On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 3:56 PM Wessels, Duane <dwessels=
40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> For me “necessary” is an important distinction and “might be useful” is
> too broad or ambiguous.  I have a hard time reconciling the idea that glue
> is not optional with the idea that it might be useful.
>

My view is less like "might be useful for reaching the nameserver", and
more like "intended for use in connecting to the nameserver".  A record is
"glue" if it is provided for the purpose of helping the resolver connect to
the nameserver indicated in the NS record.

"Necessary" doesn't work, in my view.  Whenever there are multiple A or
AAAA glue RRs, each RR is not individually "necessary".   Any glue AAAA
RRSet is basically never "necessary".

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email