[DNSOP] Re: Comments from IETF Last Call about draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error

tirumal reddy <kondtir@gmail.com> Mon, 05 May 2025 15:28 UTC

Return-Path: <kondtir@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: dnsop@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D0C224E53F9 for <dnsop@mail2.ietf.org>; Mon, 5 May 2025 08:28:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id THSiPyS9G8h8 for <dnsop@mail2.ietf.org>; Mon, 5 May 2025 08:28:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-x62a.google.com (mail-ej1-x62a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62a]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 470B424E5289 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 May 2025 08:27:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x62a.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-ac3fcf5ab0dso750631166b.3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 05 May 2025 08:27:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1746458874; x=1747063674; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=FYJG4CTjJaluuHeAycrhNfZPUBw7TGe9wmkr3lP3LAM=; b=f4FkmvFvffGVVKE8meD8QaR9eGjspLAGL9lNi0ijOEHVZwTd/H+tEmlIBgEDOckPyB ZGCRKMH2PHTwfVK5MOVP0oKu6Vlsl08skS3SzdQo/l2QKwU3qSFf48EqZ1V3LMrgSoM4 sW+BK94Z+7+kN1RXqYkiykO19CgI2LVDyfiT+2g6dqhFiOYGAVsw/OzPxKCH2kvF/336 9a8STplm+k3b4Yb97n1bLrLOFRIvHR5SpdQMPmMsWhN5IsvJT/ZXDhVnN4hH8ggVTY9H BDzENGDD7t2FvUImOKCFJh+8MOgP6F0+JIiRxCDEFxRPoMpRqa8pWNT6AWMObX3uITif 2MyQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1746458874; x=1747063674; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=FYJG4CTjJaluuHeAycrhNfZPUBw7TGe9wmkr3lP3LAM=; b=bhmopQ/kd4N/30c0vcQ+2nm+I7GboCgVXzXhY0A3/jeP1VWQNT4bdJtKVm2fg7e6rS eOu7Mha+PCLhueQploggjW2hSyAaYz5UmKbuBv2yL9j+Yh9ukUVjssCeKpWnBDYGhyNm PjnoNMoz3rTYclvnpClzvCEeymm+a20UTcetlMikxB02TjQ9GL23vwYm3+NgX6/usZf4 /nEBaDmUk93z1vgxrwn+mW4CFfXpSSoZydkt8uqW68n6Z7l1soAbTAchVd72K7d9rQJl QMC1+9LyPume/+eE6/L0i8xnsmkTmHTxYYZs81o4C5gX+huMMFwFJvAvE1OIuXIPWjBV i5WQ==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWAgrDvH34cRvJ7piC253FWgPPpDOBdWYf6vxh8OFsESBsljfOy09DB5Xk2xZPe89r54dOljQ==@ietf.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxGCAJrdVKMaZ4IHpNHZqp8k8PZHu3sP/7KLjFnOSlRNJ6+tD13 i0g0TSsOqldDfjWHumZGP0ymOHZn6eu4LXRlxVzgN62dWJJfxfWqK93q9c4yG4v4gdiRzgjYmpV KRRhlcvFJuRXo3Y139W9jMoVbGjg=
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsx88ZVA7MKPlNqgJ2BYrRVpfmFJwjjaJgDsQsBJXK8wJG+QQ0+3m3Nw+qePi4 cr1nlGBHdsqLttdS1QGVMQHk34ZuwDhOuVQZWRCFPBgXudcfib7e8Fayoaa8WheCDwL8Y4jUM7W YNxtcxF9kirSnMV8H5Wo0Z4QUG
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEcCGvJKkG3Td239y4iWSpshFJutpmloYG9UngFlXXL6HN18itKUR3FXOK0Wmt+Ospse5lQkRLHUp+9g0wUAcw=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:f495:b0:ac2:9683:ad25 with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-ad1906adc98mr901429966b.34.1746458873973; Mon, 05 May 2025 08:27:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <PH0PR11MB49666C9FAA1DC4C04EB7AEDBA98E2@PH0PR11MB4966.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <53398b3c-98a2-4282-92eb-b694761b8875@isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <53398b3c-98a2-4282-92eb-b694761b8875@isc.org>
From: tirumal reddy <kondtir@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 20:57:15 +0530
X-Gm-Features: ATxdqUEaA9tzQd-isKPgVTD9QIr67ZIv7oPoh9X9amVBdySnaJUtJcq4cfQao9M
Message-ID: <CAFpG3gchc9JGHbDnpit5ib+Vg8j737QLczfAB7UTmQYvpE+F3g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Petr Špaček <pspacek@isc.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cc51bf0634652499"
Message-ID-Hash: KCGHNNGXV3HXCGX6TC4IE2WOI7DIAPLN
X-Message-ID-Hash: KCGHNNGXV3HXCGX6TC4IE2WOI7DIAPLN
X-MailFrom: kondtir@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-dnsop.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [DNSOP] Re: Comments from IETF Last Call about draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/NIoCI2waJNbBUQ6eF-k91XCfNfw>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:dnsop-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dnsop-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dnsop-leave@ietf.org>

On Mon, 5 May 2025 at 20:32, Petr Špaček <pspacek@isc.org> wrote:

> On 5/5/25 14:49, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
> > Dear authors and WG,
> >
> > There have been substantive IETF Last Call comments once extending the
> > review outside of DNSOP. On my own read of the comments, there are two
> > critical ones:
> >
> >   * Are full-text explanations better or worse from UX or security point
> >     of view ?
> >   * Should the draft merge/include/... with draft-nottingham-public-
> >     resolver-errors ?
>
> Shameless plug: There is also a technical objection in
>
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/dsouS0lgD8UK36rWgqBkq8LKSWo/
>
> under "Issue #1".
>
> The current text breaks assumptions about EDE Option usage defined in
> RFC 8914 and does not state a good reason for it.
>

This topic was discussed within the WG, and there was consensus to reuse
the EDE Option in the request as a signal of client interest in structured
data, please see slide 4 in
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/115/materials/slides-115-dnsop-structured-data-for-filtered-dns-01.
The
same EDNS(0) option is permitted in both requests and responses, for
example, RFC7828 (edns-tcp-keepalive) specifies the use of the option in
both request/response.

It also maintains symmetry between signaling support for this feature and
delivering structured error information using the same option.

-Tiru


>
> --
> Petr Špaček
> Internet Systems Consortium
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-leave@ietf.org
>