Re: [DNSOP] Please review in terminology-bis: In-bailiwick, Out-of-bailiwick, In-domain, Sibling domain

fujiwara@jprs.co.jp Fri, 15 December 2017 02:30 UTC

Return-Path: <fujiwara@jprs.co.jp>
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 81C07127867 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 18:30:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 cmbNwg1f5cpE for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 18:30:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from off-send01.osa.jprs.co.jp (off-send01.osa.jprs.co.jp [IPv6:2001:218:3001:17::10]) (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 F202012704B for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 18:30:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from off-sendsmg01.osa.jprs.co.jp (off-sendsmg01.osa.jprs.co.jp [172.23.8.61]) by off-send01.osa.jprs.co.jp (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id vBF2U32H002233; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 11:30:03 +0900
Received: from off-sendsmg01.osa.jprs.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss71 (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD890180064; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 11:30:01 +0900 (JST)
Received: from localhost (off-cpu05.osa.jprs.co.jp [172.23.4.15]) by off-sendsmg01.osa.jprs.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF6AC180062; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 11:30:00 +0900 (JST)
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 11:30:00 +0900
Message-Id: <20171215.113000.152427157235084555.fujiwara@jprs.co.jp>
To: ggm@algebras.org
Cc: marka@isc.org, dnsop@ietf.org, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org
From: fujiwara@jprs.co.jp
In-Reply-To: <CAKr6gn0qYq7mwhf69ykb7RU3xk2tTVLDLtGJGstE0EOsWdiE6g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <56BEBCFA-D6BA-4BD1-8B95-190375A57C06@isc.org> <20171213.204234.76214525553211985.fujiwara@jprs.co.jp> <CAKr6gn0qYq7mwhf69ykb7RU3xk2tTVLDLtGJGstE0EOsWdiE6g@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5 on Emacs 24.4 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-7"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1690-8.1.0.1062-23530.004
X-TM-AS-Result: No--15.953-5.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--15.953-5.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: sbZa3S7lkwxCXIGdsOwlUu5i6weAmSDKZggZX8gYmrWo+b+yOP0oGHE9 8vK91Z4Whv8Adff05PpwouDsIRL+EI4CTcyNRTN3JrUxoq6hvw8Po0vi0aZfNQlbhF7ZTanLEW4 +DfKR/mE56WD6kuo88f8KtL8xX4mR+uobhwVz9gCRxP6bcyML8WGNLTRnb5Yt1jpotO/+/6IDh5 XrP5wcJ+LPNWnqmqF//BUfMjFyUxS6DbmOdQomtARH1Nr7oERd+KgiyLtJrSD9k2xa9Ahjg8+cw CLpvDnE5HVHMPpMs/zGsxJP3ZWJYPJTDg3ZC9Juqbg9uWhLYLdBldmDYjwlpudTjSOFC/vqo8WM kQWv6iXE6c2GmTspMEkEKHyz1RwNZz0AAGWYgqKg5oovEWFmKY6HM5rqDwqtoH3xd1DXwHzven7 oryAKFzg5YMkuG4nOczF70t23mPvRbeOlQyt7CQ==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/GItbIfmlZLUhal52nk4LMKJEbJg>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Please review in terminology-bis: In-bailiwick, Out-of-bailiwick, In-domain, Sibling domain
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: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 02:30:12 -0000

Thanks.

Adding a example as a text is a little complicated.

Adding examples as a table is good ? or too large ?

Delegation  | Parent | Name Server Name   | Type
            | Zone   |                    |
------------+--------+--------------------+------------------------------
com         | .      | a.gtld-servers.net | in-bailiwick / sibling domain
net         | .      | a.gtld-servers.net | in-bailiwick / in-domain
example.org | org    | ns.example.org     | in-bailiwick / in-domain
example.org | org    | ns.ietf.org        | in-bailiwick / sibling domain
example.org | org    | ns.example.com     | out-of-bailiwick
example.jp  | jp     | ns.example.jp      | in-bailiwick / in-domain
example.jp  | jp     | ns.example.ne.jp   | in-bailiwick / sibling domain
example.jp  | jp     | ns.example.com     | out-of-bailiwick

--
Kazunori Fujiwara, JPRS <fujiwara@jprs.co.jp>

> From: George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org>
> feels like a concrete example in a.b.c.example.com terms would help
> define both in-baliwick, and out-of-baliwick, for the cases.
> 
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 9:42 PM,  <fujiwara@jprs.co.jp> wrote:
>> Thanks.
>>
>> terminology-bis-08:
>> | In-bailiwick: An adjective to describe a name server whose name is
>> |    either subordinate to or (rarely) the same as the zone origin.
>>
>> Ok, In-bailwick in terminology-bis-08 may be restrictive because "the
>> zone origin" is unclear. I intended that "the zone origin" is the zone
>> origin of parent zone. The sentence needs more words.
>>
>> NEW
>>
>>   In-bailiwick: An adjective to describe a name server whose name is
>>        either subordinate to or (rarely) the same as the origin
>>        of the zone that contains the delegation to the name server.
>>
>> ... bad english text ... please fix.
>>
>> --
>> Kazunori Fujiwara, JPRS <fujiwara@jprs.co.jp>
>>
>>> From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
>>> The text for "in-bailwick" is too restrictive, it doesn’t just cover NS records or
>>> glue records.
>>>
>>> In-bailwick refers to records that in the normal course of DNS resolution
>>> would have been requested of by the server the current response is from.
>>> e.g. if you are querying a .com server then all records in the response that end
>>> with .com are in-bailwick.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>> On 5 Dec 2017, at 5:27 am, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Greetings again.
>>>>
>>>> Some of the new terms added to the terminology-bis draft (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis/)since RFC 7719 can be a bit tricky. This week, we hope you will look at the definitions in the draft for:
>>>> - In-bailiwick
>>>> - Out-of-bailiwick
>>>> - In-domain
>>>> - Sibling domain
>>>> Please review these terms and comment on the list if you think the definitions should change.
>>>>
>>>> --Paul Hoffman
>>>>
>>>> [[ As a reminder, we asked the following last week, but got no reply: For the past many versions of the terminology-bis draft (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis/) Section 2 has definitions of "Global DNS" and "Private DNS", based on the facets listed in "Naming system". This was discussed heavily on the list earlier, but it is also a pretty big change, so we want to be sure that it is what the WG wants. Please review these terms and comment on the list if you think the definitions should change. ]]
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> DNSOP mailing list
>>>> DNSOP@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mark Andrews, ISC
>>> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
>>> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742              INTERNET: marka@isc.org
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> DNSOP mailing list
>>> DNSOP@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> DNSOP mailing list
>> DNSOP@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>