Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data
Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Thu, 25 July 2019 17:32 UTC
Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 D579C120176 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 10:32:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 QgB_tMYlTHpK for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 10:32:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CC3A120135 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 10:32:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45vfRk17p5zKwB; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 19:32:34 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1564075954; bh=WAaTHESNizkQOzb3VI3jH57iOPFsWIPZc9sAM5sa/os=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=lwtAzWN5OmoK51iXf8m274tQCw0bP4/lA3m80bpFjpmGyowlKvK1HWunVA2djNlrR Tv9YQkQXW80k5y2saF1x20bIpaK2vK/4sIk9ccBvXkQxGa2reTNK7rTUSPDtlW5aG3 YcrpNneb8i7QUd4Twt6l0g3F7Y0wBXv3xGGxCX80=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m0RP6Ri-FcZA; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 19:32:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 19:32:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3F36C394973; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 13:32:32 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bofh.nohats.ca 3F36C394973
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3437D406FE60; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 13:32:32 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 13:32:32 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Ólafur Guðmundsson <olafur=40cloudflare.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
cc: Dan Mahoney <dmahoney@isc.org>, Evan Hunt <each@isc.org>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAN6NTqymm6+OMet0sMZC0Ms5E_5mj_nwONk3fR19HwgWXYNB4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1907251332070.10708@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <20190706213024.GA56650@isc.org> <alpine.BSF.2.21.9999.1907221704030.7062@bikeshed.isc.org> <CAN6NTqymm6+OMet0sMZC0Ms5E_5mj_nwONk3fR19HwgWXYNB4Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/LNQ0qLQFYfDBTDTAEPjIaj3sx9Y>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data
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: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 17:32:37 -0000
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019, Ólafur Guðmundsson wrote: > I think all of this makes sense, what does not make sense is to stuff this into old "AXFR/IXFR" semantics. > The draft is already changing how "upstream" deals with "downstream" in this proposal. > My suggestion is to take a step back and say we have outgrown AXFR and we need better mechanism to sync > various servers. > Lets start work on a new "SYNC Name servers" protocol that can meet modern requirements +1 Paul
- [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Evan Hunt
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Joe Abley
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Evan Hunt
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Witold Krecicki
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Joe Abley
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Witold Krecicki
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Joe Abley
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Witold Krecicki
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Joe Abley
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Wessels, Duane
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Witold Krecicki
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Brian Dickson
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Richard Gibson
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Witold Krecicki
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Witold Krecicki
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Bill Woodcock
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Wessels, Duane
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data jabley
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Witold Krecicki
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Witold Krecicki
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Tony Finch
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Joe Abley
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Dan Mahoney
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Matthew Pounsett
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Samuel Weiler
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Ólafur Guðmundsson
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Evan Hunt
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Tim Wattenberg
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Paul Ebersman
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Dan Mahoney
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Paul Ebersman
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Dan Mahoney
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Paul Ebersman
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Bob Harold
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Paul Ebersman
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Paul Ebersman
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Dan Mahoney
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Witold Krecicki
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Paul Ebersman
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Witold Krecicki
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Joe Abley
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Witold Krecicki
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Joe Abley
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Bob Harold
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data Joe Abley
- Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data JW λ John Woodworth