Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementations
Mukund Sivaraman <muks@isc.org> Wed, 28 March 2018 19:48 UTC
Return-Path: <muks@isc.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 100D7126DC2 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 12:48:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.235
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no 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 Az-k_SJbYhyK for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 12:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.banu.com (mail.banu.com [46.4.129.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BC8D126D05 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 12:48:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jurassic (unknown [49.203.219.212]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.banu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CDCE32C0A4F; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 19:48:39 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 01:18:36 +0530
From: Mukund Sivaraman <muks@isc.org>
To: Matthijs Mekking <matthijs@pletterpet.nl>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20180328194836.GB14536@jurassic>
References: <20180324110756.GE69302@vurt.meerval.net> <9a03dbfb-a4c7-9ca2-22c4-d00a0d0d0223@nlnetlabs.nl> <CADyWQ+G7oR5M9pHgj5Ty+4yL1nsep2mpujLiE7nf__kVmN13fQ@mail.gmail.com> <20180328151939.GA19504@jurassic> <a1a97166-453f-08bb-72d4-120012bfa6bd@pletterpet.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <a1a97166-453f-08bb-72d4-120012bfa6bd@pletterpet.nl>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/MUcBDJ9bdHR05yR6R-DjGVBOKMk>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementations
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 28 Mar 2018 19:48:57 -0000
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 05:29:18PM +0200, Matthijs Mekking wrote: > As mentioned in the meeting, I am in favor of requiring implementations > before drafts become standards. > > However, I would be opposed to limit acceptable implementations to the few > major open source DNS implementations (define major). It should be > acceptable for other organizations or just persons to contribute a reference > implementation. It depends on the topic of the draft of course, esp. where in operations it applies. If it is nameserver territory, I absolutely want to see an implementation in *any* of the major DNS implementations. By major, I mean the popular ones (e.g., PowerDNS, NSD, Unbound, Knot, etc.) This is because: * A full-fledged nameserver is somewhat different from a toy implementation in performance and scalability (this point is from experience with a bad implementation of a draft) * The rest of us want to see proof that it can be implemented (not just a promise or mention of implementation) and play with it and observe operational characteristics _freely_, and determine whether a draft will really improve things in the way it says it will. E.g., take all the multiple-answer drafts that are making the rounds.. in Singapore there was a presentation of a grand matrix of them, but who knows how they actually perform? It's 2018. We aren't living in the dark ages with a single DNS implementation. If a draft is for nameserver software to implement, and if the authors cannot implement it by themselves, they can persuade one of the open source vendors to do so. If they are unable to persuade any, that should be enough consensus about how significant that draft is. Speaking for myself, we in our DNS implementation add support for several drafts early in the draft stage because they look necessary or interesting, or because we want to know how they behave early on. Mukund
- [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementations Job Snijders
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Petr Špaček
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Willem Toorop
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… tjw ietf
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Mukund Sivaraman
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… bert hubert
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Matthijs Mekking
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… tjw ietf
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Tony Finch
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Job Snijders
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Frederico A C Neves
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Frederico A C Neves
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Mukund Sivaraman
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Mukund Sivaraman
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Mukund Sivaraman
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Arsen STASIC
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Tony Finch
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Tony Finch
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Jan Komissar (jkomissa)
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Suzanne Woolf
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Mukund Sivaraman
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Matthijs Mekking
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Petr Špaček
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Petr Špaček
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… 神明達哉
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… tjw ietf
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… 神明達哉
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… Evan Hunt
- Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementa… 神明達哉