IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] The DNSOP WG has placed draft-woodworth-bulk-rr in state "Candidate for WG Adoption"

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Mon, 24 July 2017 17:08 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.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 95CEA131D21 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 10:08:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 qly89MHef3rN for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 10:08:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [24.104.150.213]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22D8712EBF7 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 10:08:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.8.200.238] (unknown [136.179.21.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7CDE661FF3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:08:41 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <59762997.1040708@redbarn.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 10:08:39 -0700
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 5.0.16 (Windows/20170718)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
References: <150040947342.11401.6673996996138598307.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAKr6gn3xHZ6bzSSLoLt0FQzBrunqFPa-PFG6bAjLpfdEsD_iGQ@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.20.1707190347390.10419@ns0.nohats.ca> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1707191023090.27210@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <A05B583C828C614EBAD1DA920D92866BD081C441@PODCWMBXEX501.ctl.intranet> <AED0BED0-BF26-4FD2-9ACD-F2043C248C1A@rfc1035.com> <A05B583C828C614EBAD1DA920D92866BD081E686@PODCWMBXEX501.ctl.intranet> <3E029203-62B9-43ED-992C-CBF4A33156EC@powerdns.com> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1707241428270.16637@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1707241428270.16637@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/Ou6j8WbNuek-GRbEcdhDQTLCzWY>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] The DNSOP WG has placed draft-woodworth-bulk-rr in state "Candidate for WG Adoption"
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: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:08:50 -0000


Tony Finch wrote:
> Peter van Dijk<peter.van.dijk@powerdns.com>  wrote:
>> One could make $GENERATE more efficient without actually implementing
>> the BULK RR, by taking your pattern matching logic and implementing it
>> inside the name server.
>
> Andrew Sullivan was right to say that there is an advantage to having BULK
> as an RR compared to the $GENERATE master file directive, because an RR
> makes it easier to interoperate across multiple providers in a
> multi-master DNS setup.

i think there's only an advantage if zone slaves, and not just 
multi-masters, can generate responses from the BULK record.

-- 
P Vixie

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email