Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel-07

João Damas <joao@bondis.org> Fri, 23 March 2018 18:15 UTC

Return-Path: <joao@bondis.org>
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 D8DDC126D45 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 11:15:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, 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 r4F3ZmMMPWk4 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 11:15:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp1.bondis.org (smtp1.bondis.org [194.176.119.250]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E33D126CD6 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 11:15:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.56.227.23] (unknown [31.4.181.105]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: joao) by smtp1.bondis.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CC2D4620213; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 19:18:51 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: João Damas <joao@bondis.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (15D100)
In-Reply-To: <5AB540A3.8060609@redbarn.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 18:15:53 +0000
Cc: Ondřej Surý <ondrej@isc.org>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, "Wessels, Duane" <dwessels@verisign.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0C5CC345-02F7-48F5-825C-DFFDF70D5552@bondis.org>
References: <83786E94-ABCA-43F9-A038-F8F61C93E797@isc.org> <783C0A50-0DC5-4BC6-A105-F19D2BEF98E4@apnic.net> <C771B8F7-E9D4-4CAC-9277-EAE3AC74CC62@isc.org> <CAHw9_iJM4nZyoytk7xgY_OzU9c7BCEpO4O+Jex9g6A58XYREGw@mail.gmail.com> <936585F3-9471-40F9-9D11-E9BBAAF90B4A@isc.org> <CAHw9_i++HAh5ZeOYB2MNHn6sQu2+ixY-aHnHDOGODu0Tq=bKyA@mail.gmail.com> <63E394C7-88B6-4DE5-9015-73C6185AFC5E@verisign.com> <40AE444C-EE44-449B-9A70-159A6F91D5BD@isc.org> <162F7A9B-6B3F-4E0D-B6DB-E5BE9D8E30D5@bondis.org> <5AB540A3.8060609@redbarn.org>
To: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/H-l37yro-3u0V499yAZJtz0KeAI>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel-07
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, 23 Mar 2018 18:15:59 -0000

A design team to pick a label? Wow, just wow!

João

> On 23 Mar 2018, at 18:00, Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> wrote:
> 
> i'm concerned about the age-old human protocol being employed here.
> 
> first one guy shouts bikeshed! (usually somebody who's been bikeshedding.)
> 
> nextly, some folks say "the details don't matter, only uniqueness."
> 
> then there's a bunch of back and forth about whether and which details matter.
> 
> then there's a lot of folks saying, "personally i would go with..." or "i prefer ..." or "my vote is for..."
> 
> then somebody inevitably says "this is taking too long, let's just pick something."
> 
> it's how ipv6 and dnssec were standardized, with sweepingly bad results that our great grandchildren will no doubt shake their heads about, in wonder.
> 
> i request a different protocol.
> 
> can the co-chairs convene a design team made up of people from each camp named above, and lock them in a room and shove pizza under the door until they have a proposal that can be accepted on its _merits_?
> 
> vixie
> 
> re:
> 
> Joao Damas wrote:
>> I am happy with whatever the wg agrees but let’s agree, otherwise time keeps sliding and the only label that is going to be accurate for the next generations will be “ksk-roll-that-never-was” ;)
>> 
>> Joao
>> 
>>> On 23 Mar 2018, at 16:13, Ondřej Surý<ondrej@isc.org>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I also prefer #2
>>> 
>>> Personally, I would go with rzksk-sentinel because it’s shorter and more accurate, but #2 will make me happy.
>>> 
>>> Ondrej
>>> --
>>> Ondřej Surý — ISC
>>> 
>>>> On 23 Mar 2018, at 15:20, Wessels, Duane<dwessels@verisign.com>  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mar 23, 2018, at 5:13 AM, Warren Kumari<warren@kumari.net>  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Dear DNSOP,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please clearly express a preference for:
>>>>> 1: Keeping the current label -- kskroll-sentinel-is-ta-20326.example.com
>>>>> 2: Changing it to the new label -- root-key-sentinal-is-ta-20326.example.com
>>>>> 
>>>> I prefer #2.
>>>> 
>>>> DW
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> DNSOP mailing list
>> DNSOP@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
> 
> -- 
> P Vixie
>