IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] dnames, was My "toxic" remark at the mic today

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 06 November 2015 07:18 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A281C1B3128 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 23:18:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.837
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.837 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 lsadACIHqgiV for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 23:18:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48E6D1B3109 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 23:18:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 95768 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2015 07:17:58 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=17617.563c5426.k1511; bh=44z05+DKlqpfwiyXVBr5l278WYXHtB02hARLgfE45Sc=; b=N834bWX1anksnA50OLv+jMhOubWr1CsrHxe28CtF0W1oEw+Okr7x1an/NLbQ4uXbatNj9lUeBL1DJmP88MHtBmwJEkps+vCqEpOgjKVAZg+QlD5aY1kJJ8iGMwCBKkHew8JAWxX/9wvlEl3SBSZXgoiYPQYMkHxmp0QY7lA0QQMT5897c520aWuA/m3cmsXedBw78ja+lFGERpCjxjO8YrUwSU8nUPFQ1wHd0LERix0M1+3rrwSh1qEljH3ZlFPa
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=17617.563c5426.k1511; bh=44z05+DKlqpfwiyXVBr5l278WYXHtB02hARLgfE45Sc=; b=a5K0hdXhS0XmUshq/ezSY04KdMv4yc8Iq1mUAoBf5N1Pq4KUjuLkxsM08fM9sFdBRdgtPEGeAUTilFPqoziHwwj+t/WSD0Osbgb2ZcpSZyH3wzcnlhEZLPV1Wd/T6w9Nfib5DfD05HcGV9k16oB0aZG2o0Ntj8IMmXen87qwv502DcCrTswQ0zscQh0KOZDdtOzmRpkjioDfOAgSkdfxsMYAqHjkTRDrAMQWp+3RNVcaL6Xhq3poQccOA3eiVtYp
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.0/X.509/SHA1) via TCP6; 06 Nov 2015 07:17:58 -0000
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2015 16:17:54 +0900
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.11.1511061607350.79472@ary.local>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>
In-Reply-To: <90A15CB0-C8C4-46E1-9E0E-DB249C61A8F1@frobbit.se>
References: <20151105105009.53009.qmail@ary.lan> <90A15CB0-C8C4-46E1-9E0E-DB249C61A8F1@frobbit.se>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (OSX 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/BDdtMjm6Ysmnpv2PUdIh-dVSaYI>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org, ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] dnames, was My "toxic" remark at the mic today
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 06 Nov 2015 07:18:01 -0000

>> I'm not sure how toxic it is, but I agree that we are unlikely to have
>> anything useful to say on the topic.
>
> Speaking personally, I do not see DNAME toxic, but the question has almost always been:

To clarify, it's us offering advice on what goes into the root zone that's 
toxic, not dname specifically.

> - How to resolve an interest for having DNAME "work" for the zone apex itself
>
> I think the 2nd of these is a non-issue if "we" do have the assumption 
> data in TLDs are "delegation only", which I do know is not true for all 
> TLDs, but it is still what i personally think is the best to do.

The dnames for the Taiwan and Iran TLDs appear to work fine.

There are TLDs with A, AAAA, and MX records (see RFC 7085) but there 
aren't many, and if they wanted to use dnames, they could deal with it.

R's,
John

PS: The dnames in .cat don't work at all, but apparently nobody cares.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email