Re: [DNSOP] ANAME precedence [issue #58]

I've commented on the GH issue directly.

-Anthony

P.S. To everyone involved, thank you for continuing your hard work on this
specification.

On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 5:45 AM Matthijs Mekking <matthijs@pletterpet.nl>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would like to start separate threads on the remaining issues of the
> ANAME draft. One issue that remains to be solved is whether having an A
> or AAAA record next to the ANAME should take precedence or not.
>
>   Draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-aname/
>   Issue: https://github.com/each/draft-aname/issues/58
>
> This was discussed face to face during IETF 101 and at that time the
> conclusion was that the correct behavior is that ANAME takes precedence:
> If you implement ANAME, the target lookup for A and AAAA will always be
> made. If the lookup succeeds, the sibling address records are replaced
> with the target address records. If the lookup fails, the sibling
> address records remain in the zone.
>
> Jan Včelák mentioned that at least NS1 uses a different order of
> priority: If an sibling address record exists next to the ANAME it takes
> precedence and no target lookup is done for that address record type.
>
> In order to provide identical behavior between providers (make ANAME
> work in the multi-provider model) we should agree on the priority order.
>
> To me, it makes much more sense to use the sibling address record as a
> default, and the ANAME target lookup can replace the sibling address
> records. The target address records will improve the answer.
>
> If you place an override, adding an address record next to ANAME, you
> can achieve the same thing by not placing the ANAME record in your zone
> at all.
>
> But when the sibling address records take precedence, it has the
> property that you can set up ANAME for only one address type, for
> example ANAME for A but not for AAAA. I would like to know if there is a
> good use case for having this property.
>
> I would like to hear an opinion from the working group (preferably from
> ANAME providers). Specifically do you have a preference of priority
> order? Do you think having the "set up ANAME for one address type"
> property is worth having?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matthijs
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>

-- 
DNSimple.com
http://dnsimple.com/
Twitter: @dnsimple