IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Lameness terminology (was: Status of draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis)

Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net> Thu, 03 May 2018 22:37 UTC

Return-Path: <woody@pch.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 4D3FF12EB0B for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 May 2018 15:37:16 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 IYkIWB5l_QBi for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 May 2018 15:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.pch.net (keriomail.pch.net [206.220.231.84]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFCAB12DA26 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 May 2018 15:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Footer: cGNoLm5ldA==
Received: from [IPv6:2603:3024:1005:8e00:348d:e8c5:c16:8c80] ([2603:3024:1005:8e00:348d:e8c5:c16:8c80]) (authenticated user woody@pch.net) by mail.pch.net (Kerio Connect 9.2.5 patch 3) with ESMTPSA (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256 bits)); Thu, 3 May 2018 15:37:11 -0700
From: Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_293B3DE5-97BE-40D7-84F6-5C6A4A9CB077"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.3 \(3445.6.18\))
Date: Thu, 03 May 2018 15:36:52 -0700
References: <7C873271-A784-4594-91A3-48C697EEC613@vpnc.org> <b3ed96d7-26fb-3d97-118b-39e8f352a38c@time-travellers.org> <87F43055-5B0E-4551-BD8D-241D93F9039F@icann.org> <0AA87D00-17F7-4D10-A72D-E4723C4A0642@icann.org> <B1F34038-595E-48A5-AFB6-20F3214BB8BF@isc.org> <EFC5B29C-48D2-4F5C-BF2D-26C26E302889@icann.org>
To: David Huberman <david.huberman@icann.org>, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>, Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org>, Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <EFC5B29C-48D2-4F5C-BF2D-26C26E302889@icann.org>
Message-Id: <40451767-9536-448B-8BBD-A592AD430A78@pch.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.6.18)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/FMRPv7sdIXTtrzuqORloM029dIs>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Lameness terminology (was: Status of draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis)
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 03 May 2018 22:37:16 -0000


> On May 3, 2018, at 3:27 PM, David Huberman <david.huberman@icann.org> wrote:
> In practical terms, when any type of registry strips away a lame delegation
> attached to a real, operating network with users behind it, and things break
> as a result…

But isn’t that, by definition, impossible?  What could break as a result of a _lame_ delegation being removed?

They’d have to be spoofing a real IP address behind their firewall, which isn’t supposed to work anyway.

                                -Bill

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email