IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-huston-kskroll-sentinel-04.txt

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Thu, 01 February 2018 21:04 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
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 4574212EE46 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 13:04:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=YzaPaEKE; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=LtIKLYTF
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 Ssj50WWQX0jS for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 13:04:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx4.yitter.info (mx4.yitter.info [159.203.56.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05AA312F26D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 13:03:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B695BE072 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 21:03:53 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1517519033; bh=diLrqTaKEmXy0G/0E1ydzsEQPiCco62H2qbRulZWsZc=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=YzaPaEKEhg4kfEzrkyShILPXNnGo4OWhI8cN1MIpB7vTCQOVSo3Wwslg0/fDMENbd ABuPi0UabFKmBm+OPJOpEntkcV+tV1z01ySx41ffrBNiWM08ArwLHXwN4u42oOF+06 c7HDUW3BmD6OsF69VGFD18DAe86M99jUHc3rodlQ=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca
Received: from mx4.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx4.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id An7N5vTmt6tf for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 21:03:52 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2018 16:03:50 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1517519032; bh=diLrqTaKEmXy0G/0E1ydzsEQPiCco62H2qbRulZWsZc=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=LtIKLYTFVfH8R2YRzgKQuuuQezmJIB1NAEKiYbjhaW73cMwUvuE0MNnjpqPCalkb+ fksk35tuOsYCQi29GI8TjB9q8hzUGgc0f9Q09LzqGdtVF9Ebpv61aqWBb6hp2/Ra4L pLNeIvQGZ5ub1KcAvWnU9IZFJSXI6eXTVWg9lqkk=
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20180201210349.GC27125@mx4.yitter.info>
References: <151062636258.5917.14497839377888768972@ietfa.amsl.com> <20180128080134.24987d69@titan.int.futz.org> <CAHw9_iLDid5-3JJ5gffdsR_PMCAEwwxB3i7ORLiBVtKwmt0khQ@mail.gmail.com> <20180129233755.3697ee79@grisu.home.partim.org> <20180130152459.GE18485@mx4.yitter.info> <9787FD03-4E91-46DC-92E0-85513D6A9B40@hopcount.ca> <20180130185128.GI19193@mx4.yitter.info> <CAKr6gn0LSjtJL_zci1i=aUYq6bd7vDos_QfiEiS=W0kygXS_MQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAKr6gn0LSjtJL_zci1i=aUYq6bd7vDos_QfiEiS=W0kygXS_MQ@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/NbbfKB-dKg8qp7vwh1igTuxGugk>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-huston-kskroll-sentinel-04.txt
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: Thu, 01 Feb 2018 21:04:14 -0000

To be clear, I agree that it's a small point, and I was mostly
interested for other reasons having to do with another draft (the one
I mentioned).  I didn't think this was a blocking question.

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 09:44:10AM +1000, George Michaelson wrote:
> I think we're rat holing.

[…]

> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 4:51 AM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 10:42:15AM -0500, Joe Abley wrote:
> >
> >> I probably missed some. Anyway, I think when people are saying "address record" here they actually mean "IP address record".
> >>
> >
> > We should probably say that, then, and also of course we should fix
> > the poor text in the teminology document to point this out.



-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email