IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] remarks on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-01

Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> Sat, 21 March 2015 14:12 UTC

Return-Path: <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C99D1AC39F for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 07:12:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.56
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.56 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 UCzNw46wzwRM for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 07:12:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from albireo.enyo.de (albireo.enyo.de [46.237.207.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDA551AC39E for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 07:12:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.17.203.2] (helo=deneb.enyo.de) by albireo.enyo.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) id 1YZK8I-0007YJ-LO; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 15:12:10 +0100
Received: from fw by deneb.enyo.de with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <fw@deneb.enyo.de>) id 1YZK8I-0002Fz-Co; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 15:12:10 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: "W.C.A. Wijngaards" <wouter@nlnetlabs.nl>
References: <20150318013805.GH4385@mx1.yitter.info> <55093E8C.3030300@redbarn.org> <550A8F58.2040009@nlnetlabs.nl>
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 15:12:10 +0100
In-Reply-To: <550A8F58.2040009@nlnetlabs.nl> (W. C. A. Wijngaards's message of "Thu, 19 Mar 2015 09:56:56 +0100")
Message-ID: <87a8z630ed.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/P0ed4URROdvmA1QtqiChWThb7ME>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] remarks on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-01
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 14:12:15 -0000

* W. C. A. Wijngaards:

> +1.  Backwards compatibility means you cannot specify that existing
> implementations have to change.

Does it matter if they do not exist or are not considered practically
relevant?

As a counterexample, RFC 6891 requires FORMERR responses without OPT
RRs from implementations which do not support EDNS:

   Responders that choose not to implement the protocol extensions
   defined in this document MUST respond with a return code (RCODE) of
   FORMERR to messages containing an OPT record in the additional
   section and MUST NOT include an OPT record in the response.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email