Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-glue-is-not-optional-02.txt

Ralf Weber <dns@fl1ger.de> Wed, 28 July 2021 11:51 UTC

Return-Path: <dns@fl1ger.de>
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 E8DAC3A0ACB for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 04:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 2x9ZXaA7e8d3 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 04:51:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.guxx.net (nyx.guxx.net [85.10.208.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 365723A0AC4 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 04:51:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by nyx.guxx.net (Postfix, from userid 107) id 406825F42371; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:51:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.42.138] (p4ff53b1a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.245.59.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by nyx.guxx.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F2A385F402E7; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:51:37 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Ralf Weber" <dns@fl1ger.de>
To: "Paul Wouters" <paul@nohats.ca>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 13:51:35 +0200
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673)
Message-ID: <E08C35F2-40F6-4DF9-B894-65131ED276A8@fl1ger.de>
In-Reply-To: <f4e1d24-730-e06d-925-b8f5a9225a84@nohats.ca>
References: <20210727201504.2939B25365A4@ary.qy> <D6F6C939-5FD2-4687-8D73-E4F03181C566@isc.org> <6A6C1BAF-9640-4A6C-9220-3B0A97209C93@fl1ger.de> <f4e1d24-730-e06d-925-b8f5a9225a84@nohats.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/EOGuTrPHJxAy1_YJRnPuhiF21Xc>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-glue-is-not-optional-02.txt
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: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 11:51:49 -0000

Moin!

On 28 Jul 2021, at 5:10, Paul Wouters wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Jul 2021, Ralf Weber wrote:
>
>> However requiring authorities to put unnecessary data in the 
>> additional section
>> (the sibbling glue) is not something I support.
>
> First, as Mark said, sibling glue is sometimes needed.
It is only needed for broken circular dependancies, which we don’t 
care about.

> Second, the server will most likely not know whether or not the glue
> is needed, it will just include it so it does not have to follow the
> complicated looping zones to determine if it is needed or not. Since 
> it
> does not know if it is needed or not, it cannot make a smart decision
> on whether setting TC=1 is overkill or not. Thus the document saying
> "also for sibling glue, just set TC=1 if it does not fit".
Ok that is not what the draft says. It says you must include sibbling
glue, no matter what. Setting TC=1 if you include sibling glue and it 
can not
fit it is something different. That probably makes sense for all 
referall
where glues don’t fit.

So long
-Ralf
—--
Ralf Weber