IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Wessels, Duane" <dwessels@verisign.com> Thu, 16 December 2021 18:46 UTC

Return-Path: <dwessels@verisign.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 6FB113A0DD1 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:46:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=verisign.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 wcoJF6WcG-bw for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:46:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail6.verisign.com (mail6.verisign.com [69.58.187.32]) (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 C373F3A0DCD for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:46:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=verisign.com; l=1188; q=dns/txt; s=VRSN; t=1639680398; h=from:to:cc:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject; bh=V+C1Z1/pXcH/vkNG/G62NTmNNoywOxThoMwQIh3Mf+I=; b=Lc59RqorFeL0ZCakUYxEjeRfmbX2w9EBDtQ0PLBOIWjnUei780rzBzCx id404KqhYv3+0iz49FjCtVyspEPYwOKbidA2CagRs+AIOpppaEd9l9KFo AL2mPhn9bZJo0IkqzqQAZFM3YwPBgGJWZapkn//qDT46780xKaKwv2XQS qtOjGE8g8ETa9lHtaPWgGkH2OBxxGg6UvLeL3IB0kHnCCYM6gsgFICvzc uBsfBLnDT1kcPYV7NGVo8oVRjaLlhUwaoHE1Vi80ZaXtug48jV4leTE4I nc4sCves2c4FsXhnK/IkIpmVCC+23ThxOSRiFSb2sCvSpdCbG38Ry/9kb A==;
IronPort-Data: A9a23:a2gaVKmrXdBBQTN4H04RAjbo5gzFJ0RdPkR7XQ2eYbSJt1+Wr1Gzt xIYD2/VP63fYWHxc9sjbYjl9ktV7JHVnYBmQFdq+CBkFi4T+ZvOCOrCIxarNUt+DCFjoGGLT ik6QoOdRCzhZiaE/n9BClVlxJVF/fngqoDUUYYoAQgsA180IMsdoUg7wbdg2Nc22YPR7z6l4 rseneWOYDdJ5BYpagr424rbwP+4lK2v0N+wlgVWicFj5DcypVFMZH4sDfjZw0/Df2VhNrXSq 9AvbF2O1jixEx8FUrtJm56lKhFaGua60QKm0hK6UID66vROS7BbPg/W+5PwZG8O4whlkeydx /0WnL6aeyoSA5Trt/8ybF5dIyxiIOp/reqvzXiX6aR/zmXsSV21/NNDPBlse5MT/fxvR2hCs +ICMzZLZReG7w606OvjDLAz3YJ6cZKtYNJ3VnJIlFk1Cd4qXp3YWKjO/vdG0S0xncFBG7DVY M9xhT9HNU2dPEEQaw9/5JQWlfi3qHfZKzhj71+0tLIK/1Xa7gNc3+24WDbSUpnQLSlPpW6Ar 3/C12L+AhgGL5qUwFKt+H+pj/TEtSz8X40WGfuz8fsCqFGV3WsLIBwbSVX9puO24nNSQPpVM UpN5SwjvfBosVe1VJ/4Xgb9qnnCtAQaApxOCfY8rgqKz8I4/jqkO4TNdRYZAPROiSP8bWVCO oOh9z8xOQFSjQ==
IronPort-HdrOrdr: A9a23:pTBx5q5ZqZz8zTQ0QAPXwBjXdLJyesId70hD6qkoc20wTiSZ// rDoByCvSWE9Qr5K0tQ/uxoX5PwPU80lKQFm7X5Uo3DYOCLggGVxcRZnO7fKl7balLDH4xmpM RdmsFFYbWaMbE5t7eZ3ODSKbkdKay8kZxA8t2x854Cd2xXgupbnmFE406gYzRLrJkvP+tAKH Oz3Ls9mwad
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,212,1635220800"; d="scan'208";a="11574790"
Received: from BRN1WNEX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (10.173.153.48) by BRN1WNEX02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (10.173.153.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2375.12; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 13:46:36 -0500
Received: from BRN1WNEX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([fe80::a89b:32d6:b967:337d]) by BRN1WNEX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([fe80::a89b:32d6:b967:337d%4]) with mapi id 15.01.2375.012; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 13:46:36 -0500
From: "Wessels, Duane" <dwessels@verisign.com>
To: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
CC: Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [EXTERNAL] [DNSOP] Another attempt at consensus on the bailiwick discussion
Thread-Index: AQHX8g9YWsgLR5IaJE6uGJJ3RyhqYA==
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 18:46:35 +0000
Message-ID: <0927F1FD-7023-4DB1-8415-FCC0E60683DC@verisign.com>
References: <315888CA-4429-4038-AB6F-0D38B95A2FA2@verisign.com> <61D532C7-768E-4B32-9600-9F67202F8F98@nohats.ca>
In-Reply-To: <61D532C7-768E-4B32-9600-9F67202F8F98@nohats.ca>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.120.0.1.13)
x-originating-ip: [10.170.148.18]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <3B96710D7BC9DC42BA1A7601B6092EDC@verisign.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/C6mlsr2NYEX9oHE6DigBWOYUWdM>
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 18:46:46 -0000


> On Dec 15, 2021, at 5:31 PM, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> wrote:
> 
> On Dec 15, 2021, at 18:56, 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
> 
> Necessary for resolving, securely resolving and/or resolving with privacy ?
> 
> In other words, would a TLSA or SVCB be “necessary” or not ?
> 
> Paul

Well, that is why I feel that we’re heading in a direction where the IETF will have to say which RR types must be considered as glue (aka necessary).  Today it's just A and AAAA, but if some of the proposals in DPRIVE achieve consensus then maybe those other types become designated as glue.

DW

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status