IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] WGLC rfc8499bis one week extension for lame delegation definition

Havard Eidnes <he@uninett.no> Thu, 04 May 2023 18:07 UTC

Return-Path: <he@uninett.no>
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 AF08BC169537 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 May 2023 11:07:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 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_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=uninett.no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w2Vooeny8u3H for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 May 2023 11:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smistad.uninett.no (smistad.uninett.no [158.38.62.77]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6DD6C169539 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 May 2023 11:07:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smistad.uninett.no (smistad.uninett.no [158.38.62.77]) by smistad.uninett.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ABEC43ECED; Thu, 4 May 2023 20:07:47 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=uninett.no; s=he201803; t=1683223667; bh=csSsxaGBuW6XB+pmpPH2XL4+tSKy2eRC1GCyrflprQc=; h=Date:To:Cc:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=w8L3zCHiTika7V+A3yuaXamHG3ZU7S/vR3fLFAVCI4cqJNOpJNNjlOhrTf4Q222qp X2jKsONxJYgM1DSvvWa/iNlY7yWr6MnvOOypf7YeOLs88QrmoPt9dPgIRvcz+N1WjZ cvF8h5gxBOtA9/mNZfmGgVEKsBW1wI/KJZw+/Vfk=
Date: Thu, 04 May 2023 20:07:47 +0200
Message-Id: <20230504.200747.619569100111463947.he@uninett.no>
To: warren@kumari.net
Cc: m9p@india.emu.st, dnsop@ietf.org
From: Havard Eidnes <he@uninett.no>
In-Reply-To: <CAHw9_iLyz4dhjmXm=eeqiVqQWOjYOgs45NbCtRtvrYpTFQHz=w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1C10367C-B890-426F-A4F8-2D68E903ED39@icann.org> <0.2.0-final-1683191254.797-0xa08e34@qmda.emu.st> <CAHw9_iLyz4dhjmXm=eeqiVqQWOjYOgs45NbCtRtvrYpTFQHz=w@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.9 on Emacs 26.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/Lk_qiO5zJCCV5xgbxXvABLN-FrU>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] WGLC rfc8499bis one week extension for lame delegation definition
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 04 May 2023 18:07:55 -0000

> As an example, it's quite common for people to register a
> domain and point the DNS at some nameservers which they don't
> control, and have no relationship with.

If this is common, I'm abhorred.

Having the delegating party check for service for the requested zone
at time of delegation request and refuse to update / register if
this check fails would put an end to such behaviour, and as I said
in my previous message, would be a useful "teaching aid".

Regards,

- Håvard

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email