Re: [DNSOP] data at delegation points

Shane Kerr <> Wed, 15 April 2020 08:41 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B53FC3A0041 for <>; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 01:41:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Quarantine-ID: <ndz_0tHGK87A>
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER SECTION, Improper folded header field made up entirely of whitespace (char 20 hex): X-Spam-Report: ...T_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content previ[...]
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ndz_0tHGK87A for <>; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 01:41:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:78c8:2::11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 801E73A003B for <>; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 01:41:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([2001:470:78c8:2::9]) by with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <>) id 1jOdbl-0005VJ-AT for; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 08:41:23 +0000
References: <>
From: Shane Kerr <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 10:41:20 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score-Int: -28
X-Spam-Bar: --
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] data at delegation points
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 08:41:30 -0000

DNS friends,

On 14/04/2020 17.43, Paul Vixie wrote:
> today it was proposed that NS2 be added as a new record-set type that 
> could exist in either the parent or the child, similar to NS, and 
> reminding several of us about the DS debacle.
> DS should never have been placed at the delegation point, and has led to 
> a decade or longer of bugs and corner cases and complexity. it ought to 
> have been a nephew domain of the delegation point, but, in the parent:
> so instead of DS, it should have been DS.
> this is the approach i suggest for anything like NS2.

I think this makes abundant sense.

Some information about delegation clearly belongs in the parent, and 
only in the parent.

NS in the child-but-also the parent was clearly a bit of a bad design. 
DS in the parent-but-kind-of-also-the-child (via DNSKEY records) was an 
attempted step in the right direction, but clearly also a bit of a bad 
design. Paul's proposal (or a similar one) seems like a really good 
approach to me.

We can include something like CDS/CDNSKEY from the very beginning as 
well, as an in-band signaling for parent/child synchronization.