IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] draft-hoffman-dns-terminology-ter-01.txt - some comments

Dan York <york@isoc.org> Wed, 24 July 2019 09:44 UTC

Return-Path: <york@isoc.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 44887120135 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 02:44:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isoc.org
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 J8ESN8JJKUcK for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 02:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM03-BY2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr780084.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.78.84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D20EC120100 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 02:44:26 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=dNfI7SRnv9cU6JnaMKE7T7mxxvIsWLvdFvYsLTn7msP+27GK73cOYVSovnoN/mzKAGzkQX8FCAd3nchyq7Z7VnAOLUEcUrV/Rvmi02OlUrABUlbdbvbYCwXXe1IGs0T3GQewKXDT4TarrNtceeuIFlHh9pl3/4XdGcmYorwFOo/dYEs6RjjyRIhrIHtegSFzVLFDU+Lt1l9Ha8GLjjY80ZT0s8R2ihbglvo3Y5YZG/qm7gZUjU1I/7It/CFJrjtbwXK2IHwJW3wtyz58EKNL5t+aBHEnPY3wcbZYYJv/bKQbncrX2BVkN2KhqLEGomAJhmZMqLA7lf6buzgDCFAiYg==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=FB99PFwz5NfiJ3SSD2Oxc1CsxxES9aiWS3NbNZwTS9U=; b=AbVoim03mHVJAhRzEat7iJatp6hqn5AuqefbP7dINQd4WR4OI8rjcHOZIy+cQlnr1PN5Qs7D1GI1jmPuJq0kLCYRfrSU5djxcoyl2UAAAPhVtbJIP+Nl/+AM0cEiYJcIgPqxckju0IjyZ0+Ocz9XEvGgx6Dq9gDG/VyAFqlEkTcO7aNsxHJBpP7CXVw0BHLIDlqrA7UiSPUXsYxdp6DbedPqDU1c1U2msEhd9pL4pTFSBrNO7gZfkPq34QS5r9OUO2GPanJ8KITEEnK/BbzVm5HmhiOrPHZpob7njCo8XiwyGd5hzmEfn20Ok86+utOVG9rXIEo6xeU4dqMqOUwDQg==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1;spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=isoc.org;dmarc=pass action=none header.from=isoc.org;dkim=pass header.d=isoc.org;arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isoc.org; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=FB99PFwz5NfiJ3SSD2Oxc1CsxxES9aiWS3NbNZwTS9U=; b=fto7l00PDirQvZssUlfswKa6yNKvyz1Ykrddc0SUQDQJqJCW3956/vJtWHRfaezOYhcfUwc7NTWkXHptHEQ401l09eNI4K1tmaDpRlyj2UxLPClorqjwyE0Jpl0RpzVVhjK9yg5eUyhcfcFrfosacYYd/O+UBg2TVFJUly7N6qk=
Received: from BN8PR06MB5570.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (20.178.210.219) by BN8PR06MB6178.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (20.178.214.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2094.16; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 09:44:23 +0000
Received: from BN8PR06MB5570.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d1ec:89c9:f776:222]) by BN8PR06MB5570.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d1ec:89c9:f776:222%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2115.005; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 09:44:23 +0000
From: Dan York <york@isoc.org>
To: Normen Kowalewski <nbkowalewski@gmx.net>
CC: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>, "paul.hoffman@icann.org" <paul.hoffman@icann.org>, DNSOP WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [DNSOP] draft-hoffman-dns-terminology-ter-01.txt - some comments
Thread-Index: AQHVQO7pnOvbdJRSm0abTWF+rm4jHKbZhuAA
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 09:44:23 +0000
Message-ID: <044CFAD5-9DE2-4F34-AD04-FADE11F2D794@isoc.org>
References: <7A996832-AD59-4FA4-A6B9-40B39FDAC3D5@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <7A996832-AD59-4FA4-A6B9-40B39FDAC3D5@gmx.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=york@isoc.org;
x-originating-ip: [2001:67c:1232:144:5579:ae82:4ac3:7034]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 626270d3-4b02-4de7-b7bc-08d7101b825b
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:BN8PR06MB6178;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BN8PR06MB6178:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BN8PR06MB617842D18D6473A3CE8BDD0AB7C60@BN8PR06MB6178.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0108A997B2
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(396003)(136003)(346002)(376002)(39850400004)(366004)(189003)(199004)(54094003)(2906002)(102836004)(76116006)(99286004)(71200400001)(91956017)(6246003)(86362001)(71190400001)(14454004)(8936002)(6486002)(68736007)(6916009)(76176011)(66476007)(66556008)(64756008)(66446008)(66946007)(6506007)(6436002)(7736002)(81156014)(81166006)(305945005)(54906003)(6512007)(8676002)(53546011)(486006)(229853002)(316002)(25786009)(186003)(476003)(2616005)(36756003)(53936002)(4326008)(11346002)(5660300002)(446003)(478600001)(256004)(33656002)(46003)(6116002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BN8PR06MB6178; H:BN8PR06MB5570.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: isoc.org does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: oEyNWzcf1c6sQGmSPrNPgKDYCYqPfTurX/4epdqq+U+2izXrFDlguvoPbGHKJx5QUssftT+iHCvIjzvGLXwn4iy2uUsTAodC5EYt3CyHQ1ESA09wq48LSzPge9zNUAgHjyJbiLRl6mT3Tj1nqw7v0MamVFaq8fTsNbIITrJhc9T6+oibEkC69v/csyyN+VGUBMmTzgpnxBxBmAkbsiINdScBI+/OiCGZ6FBcy8N47dYG0Xv+ETQILxl7HnlYzZce6vA8HaxfPyEv0ZVu108l2LO1oVoOCBRb4LdaJBiVcsYX5TFCmt5UYYdL3E6kyQqTe/JcaSNrlc/UM6ByXO7xDJ6NDqQGMb6BolSGasfLTMhTrokcg/mVjBu/fJaBc8QOk1veqMgcK9Q34zvX3mlMolYbLat0PvMw8FspN43OecE=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <8DE05568C02C7A4E8FE83914D5EE42F0@namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 626270d3-4b02-4de7-b7bc-08d7101b825b
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 24 Jul 2019 09:44:23.1725 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 89f84dfb-7285-4810-bc4d-8b9b5794554f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: york@isoc.org
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN8PR06MB6178
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/MQH9ldhXwwXFLz9VPGQjmwR44b4>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-hoffman-dns-terminology-ter-01.txt - some comments
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, 24 Jul 2019 09:44:29 -0000


> On Jul 22, 2019, at 8:37 PM, Normen Kowalewski <nbkowalewski@gmx.net> wrote:
> 
> While I agree that “add” today covers discussion around the case described in here, but the reason that it covers it  is because “add” acts as a "catch all bucket" for “various DNS things not well defined”.
> If we want to cover the case of an application acts as/embed a stub resolver, we may want to define a term (and draft) that covers exactly that, instead of using the much wider term.
> 
> I wonder if something meant by "add" today, might have to drop from being meant by “add” tomorrow after that feature becomes a well defined RFC?
> Terminology would for me have to be less prone to change its meaning over time.
> 
> Thus I  propose to remove “add” from the draft.

I agree with the suggestion to remove “ADD” from the draft. “ADD” seems different than the other ones and, in my mind, not *yet* in common-enough usage where its definition would be warranted. I also agree with Norman that the longevity of using “ADD” isn’t clear. 

I’m fine with the draft being adopted with the other terms. (We can then discuss more details about those specific terms.)

My 2 cents,
Dan

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email