Re: [DNSOP] meta issue: WG to discuss DNS innovation (was Re: draft-hzhwm-start-tls-for-dns-00)

"Mark Delany" <f4t@november.emu.st> Wed, 19 February 2014 00:19 UTC

Return-Path: <f4t@november.emu.st>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB40E1A02AC for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 16:19:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1] autolearn=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 BgwrGw-NEM6d for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 16:19:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp1.bushwire.net (f5.bushwire.net [199.48.133.46]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 51ABB1A00F6 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 16:19:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 10616 invoked by uid 1001); 19 Feb 2014 00:19:50 -0000
Delivered-To: qmda-intercept-dnsop@ietf.org
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=s384; d=november.emu.st; b=rXoTOlCRKTxZNp3MHll3lxxPun0GRz8IKI5p1wTj4lSJ3YcXRbjSFo2bUKnlh5g9;
Comments: DomainKeys? See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DomainKeys
DomainKey-Trace-MD: h=23; b=15; l=C18R71D32M65F41M32T18S70?34R40?36?53?55?30?49?51?45?54?45M17C39C27I57;
Comments: QMDA 0.3
Received: (qmail 10609 invoked by uid 1001); 19 Feb 2014 00:19:50 -0000
Date: 19 Feb 2014 00:19:50 +0000
Message-ID: <20140219001950.10608.qmail@f5-external.bushwire.net>
From: "Mark Delany" <f4t@november.emu.st>
Mail-Followup-To: dnsop@ietf.org
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <52FEF407.30405@redbarn.org> <20140215140133.GA6990@sources.org> <alpine.LFD.2.10.1402151449280.23619@bofh.nohats.ca> <D82F49E8-9A06-4F52-8E3E-DF5C8D0B7549@virtualized.org> <53006595.5010207@frobbit.se> <6.2.5.6.2.20140218074550.0c380cc8@resistor.net> <5B5AE40C-6D26-419C-A16A-392AF2C33446@hopcount.ca> <20140218221948.D7541F9EB9C@rock.dv.isc.org> <20140218234946.10461.qmail@f5-external.bushwire.net> <20140219000857.2828AF9FC34@rock.dv.isc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140219000857.2828AF9FC34@rock.dv.isc.org>
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/GdwJiWuO3smFL478wflY6do5M4M
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] meta issue: WG to discuss DNS innovation (was Re: draft-hzhwm-start-tls-for-dns-00)
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 19 Feb 2014 00:19:57 -0000

> > I see now that some newer CPE defaults to 8.8.8.8 - at least that
> > eliminates the local implementation bugs...
> 
> And I would have gone ahead and implemented it as Autralian Consumer
> Law

Probably true for most jurisdictions running u-verse modems too as
they too had breakage in my (not very fancy) tests.

I eventually went for a try-this-fall-back-to-that strategy. I won't
say which RR I used as the guaranteed-to-work fallback as I might get
a public flogging :-)


Mark.