IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] status of the aname and svcb/httpsvc drafts

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Wed, 26 February 2020 21:22 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.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 C5A703A0542 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 13:22:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 j4vqFkhSuWSB for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 13:22:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [IPv6:2001:559:8000:cd::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F350A3A04BB for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 13:22:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from linux-9daj.localnet (unknown [207.242.53.83]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A07CDB074A; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 21:22:19 +0000 (UTC)
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
To: Vladimír Čunát <vladimir.cunat+ietf@nic.cz>, dnsop@ietf.org
Cc: "Andrew M. Hettinger" <AHettinger@prominic.net>, "dnsop@ietf.org WG" <dnsop@ietf.org>, Evan Hunt <each@isc.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 21:22:18 +0000
Message-ID: <2360904.o8pgGZ7Azu@linux-9daj>
Organization: none
In-Reply-To: <20200226190140.GA59757@isc.org>
References: <b34f1b0d-fa65-23d4-1b2b-761b965a2aae@knipp.de> <f5f17c26-e673-119e-e7aa-bc88f8ef46a3@nic.cz> <20200226190140.GA59757@isc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/LLv5nOJETTSxapV-X-VTqzJcP8E>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] status of the aname and svcb/httpsvc drafts
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 21:22:22 -0000

On Wednesday, 26 February 2020 19:01:40 UTC Evan Hunt wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 03:34:55PM +0100, Vladimír Čunát wrote:
> > I don't think it's so simple.  The current ANAME draft specifies new
> > behavior for resolvers, and there I'd expect even slower overall
> > upgrades/deployment than in browsers.
> 
> I agree with this. Browsers often upgrade themselves these days; resolvers
> sit for years. (A few years ago there were still BIND 4 instances ticking
> away out there.)

+1.
	
-- 
Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email