IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Mon, 25 June 2018 21:38 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 48F96130E4C for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:38:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dcrocker.net
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 5E6jwlpyCgqc for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:38:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (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 06231130E5E for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:38:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.8.128]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id w5PLehgn018670 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:40:43 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dcrocker.net; s=default; t=1529962843; bh=QDNybh2RsOE5EDiPhEkPRdVxmlvLlTIBYGhEXLkIKyw=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:Reply-To:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=I5kqq6Jyn7J58T/bn9OMN5PuNBlcLsCkCDs7UUbXVHsypToLi0/RlUFZCZcb3cdKD r+R+zOz6RKHSOl6vud3P/sPqOEQcELUUr0Sx5OIXIQnim2NeX7cHnuKPcmOeHnJ9vx OCh+HLxJBl+pV1aJUFqVNZ+cNcR0vF3FwBsWqyig=
To: Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
References: <20180625210807.7791A2888379@ary.local> <20eba6b1-af10-e4c6-60be-a742d559602a@bellis.me.uk>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <a8173616-8afe-d23c-5c2f-0ad2e32f8f56@dcrocker.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 11:38:17 -1000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20eba6b1-af10-e4c6-60be-a742d559602a@bellis.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/CM6ufAuCVG8CHXEcJJAxO2fJhnI>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 21:38:29 -0000

On 6/25/2018 11:13 AM, Ray Bellis wrote:
> On 25/06/2018 22:08, John Levine wrote:
> 
>> One minor point in attrleaf, is whether to mention the poor
>> interactions between _names and wildcards.  One issue is that
>> _blah.*.example doesn't work, the other is that *.example will match
>> underscored names which can be surprising if it has RRs of a type that
>> might be underscored, notably TXT.
> 
> Isn't the issue with wildcards already well addressed in the IAB
> document on extending the DNS ?  (RFC 5507).


Yes, but...

This is certainly a universal issue with _names and it's one that seems 
not to be obvious to many folk.  So while the mathematics of purity 
should be satisfied that the issue is document somewhere, the 
probabilities of reader psychology might encourage some judicious 
redundancy.  And RFCs nicely permit pedagogy along with specification.

I'm feeling lazy.  Care to suggest text to add and its location in 
-attrleaf, John?

d/


-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email