IETF Logo Mail Archive

[DNSOP] Re: DNSOP4 documents for consideration about the future of LocalRoot behavior.

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Fri, 23 January 2026 19:12 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: dnsop@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: dnsop@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C946AAC29ACF for <dnsop@mail2.ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Jan 2026 11:12:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M-MMdYzECwaM for <dnsop@mail2.ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Jan 2026 11:12:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256)) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 778AFAC29AC6 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Jan 2026 11:12:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A80218018; Fri, 23 Jan 2026 14:12:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with LMTP id aZ8hMCgCaZPG; Fri, 23 Jan 2026 14:12:50 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1769195569; bh=8w1xCRWlm0tdyi6si/e5jB2yXvfI2pBLEGV9CKakCes=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=oMsxdoq5rbixCA3haSM+8vAbksPZKy7GX40OnSQigUQiO4/4M9moXSHwIK6WQot6X W6cT7pBkCrmOhAedjQhg6vhjtlEaBMQLHrnD5Z90GSLVGJLTDuY81XjLdMfa8oiQ36 oXxGy1djWt1AjURxpz/N4CM3DlNm/BUAKxZRVDxKzmwtM2rqOzDvXLsMSuhQwQcPzc ZpMIxIeM6tPCn0pSeRMP0d4q+FHVhph4h8soMU90n6j4l/kx0L2VZaBA4nh821I7rS /JZJ9Rc8PbZksAj29qbJfJ1DzTNxuolt8p2srDmcliQfCd7ee2SKixV505G3Qyjl2I RoKBji64PzUdA==
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE6D118014; Fri, 23 Jan 2026 14:12:49 -0500 (EST)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAD3117C; Fri, 23 Jan 2026 14:12:49 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Ben Schwartz <bemasc@meta.com>, Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <DS0PR15MB567499ECC061876A8A244F35B394A@DS0PR15MB5674.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
References: <ybla4y6lwjf.fsf@wx.hardakers.net> <CAKr6gn0yUL1X87+BavA569LGMaWe2VY4a6-iqTAmzwdrZVPx_g@mail.gmail.com> <ybla4y6ia6t.fsf@wx.hardakers.net> <CAKr6gn1L=hHOj2he0Rs_38B5n3pnNZw3xFMx36QLcjthJfUosQ@mail.gmail.com> <yblwm1agppa.fsf@wx.hardakers.net> <25556.1769124242@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <DS0PR15MB567499ECC061876A8A244F35B394A@DS0PR15MB5674.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.8+dev; Emacs 30.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0;<'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 14:12:49 -0500
Message-ID: <24347.1769195569@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Message-ID-Hash: KLAHWK344RVFOBRRK22HPPW762XNWPVE
X-Message-ID-Hash: KLAHWK344RVFOBRRK22HPPW762XNWPVE
X-MailFrom: mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-dnsop.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [DNSOP] Re: DNSOP4 documents for consideration about the future of LocalRoot behavior.
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/IeuM1icnnaensaUiVStL8qBRgCA>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:dnsop-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dnsop-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dnsop-leave@ietf.org>

Ben Schwartz <bemasc@meta.com> wrote:
    > I assume the authors considered this option and concluded that it isn't
    > sufficient.  I'd like to know why.  Then we can add the minimum
    > complexity needed to alleviate those concerns.

I think that they concluded that the root server operators were not, at the
time, willing.  Or perhaps that it was premature to expend the political
effort to convince them.

Maybe that's not the case anymore.

I also think that it's worth expanding beyond the "13"
Remember that this eliminates all of the root NS priming.
No outside dependancies if the things you need to talk to are nearby.
Like for an island like Tonga.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status