Re: [DNSOP] Empty Non-Terminal sentinel for Black Lies

Brian Dickson <> Wed, 28 July 2021 00:46 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCE023A13BC for <>; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 17:46:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 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_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 78Kar9nTgzub for <>; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 17:46:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::129]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 538ED3A13BE for <>; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 17:46:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id d18so689030lfb.6 for <>; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 17:46:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LUawE/E1Qspqa5Di0CzQwMG+O39iQ9yLfK29DhkhS2w=; b=UsgMTwE4Gx2w2b46L8h4DzKCnqu2/pgNfXuHP74suOjLPUDIqSbxfu9zvZO5s7Yso3 uzLDmVtlBd/Lhn/chXiYHQvZ7pLKESwbMSKKU/LjsSiapuWWCQeItq8c/sBjtc4wAsMa mFGLuCbc62Y4dl/g5sFBzg1C8oS1NBWgpmhfumAf3wvMZ78sNKjpIkDk35l763P6AYD/ jB2A8u+4hgHJZIj2rbJwNmnR/1jEJIXgNn3X152wrEoR4z1v6O7/MS/S7l3f98mRR7Tn NfiprzD2J8PpAuS/ZWaGnF4WRt0q9h+NCpP45cMk+zaiTle9bVTF9Ub/tOHN2LbbU56y A52A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LUawE/E1Qspqa5Di0CzQwMG+O39iQ9yLfK29DhkhS2w=; b=Imay76e0rhnFoKWMxycKW03xBQObXRCQZtT7IfnSrAqpxg0wIyxjo25cztH0VvU/Kc bU/eYiaInKWFk5eTt1lEfS06YdIDYIvU2PnFWX3i9Avt4YjAJab2ebOFCcUupzQb32IN ni1W9CRZxKZtIyRnNvaA78aLk8/2vpBvmQSQq2ypg3P3aDBdSwoMiYW6LXHxlm7JVP0D Svx/yd6DsyCv5BpRm8sxF1fmDjLTNBh9JV5aZSbx2NNX8VyJ87ON42lVJcm++soLemuQ vJj9lyJAI6elIWYrPs54qwL+TRk0ldB3rDYnKwrLPBsU8/5LCWWPTk6KeSSAEt6AY8Ka ceqw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531R5+U83okyPULSMCE3drhqmyU27fJv7NWHC1lito8UWIqKNza7 bb2vURcTnjErSpY8xVDKEDSNDHRm4V7SRKekHt8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwkIGaYeRlPOG7Gm8n2fH9/gISaqAfZDlp1ptntXnY1DvwEs6WsSW68VS8g+DswJqPUTNlkL0sAu3j4Ay0gWKA=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:31c8:: with SMTP id j8mr19235051lfe.458.1627433198724; Tue, 27 Jul 2021 17:46:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Brian Dickson <>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2021 17:46:27 -0700
Message-ID: <>
To: Shumon Huque <>
Cc: " WG" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b4accd05c8245115"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Empty Non-Terminal sentinel for Black Lies
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 00:46:46 -0000

On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 4:35 PM Shumon Huque <> wrote:

> Folks,
> While we have the attention of DNSOP folks this week, I'd like to ask for
> review of this draft (I meant to send it earlier in time for f2f discussion
> on Tuesday, but better late than never).
That's interesting, and I'm definitely in favor of continuing this work.

 A couple of quick questions:

   - Are there distinctions between NSEC and NSEC3, where ENTs and/or
   negative proofs result in different response sets?
   - Would it make sense to include the synthetic ENT RR as an actual RR in
   the unsigned zones for such names (i.e. which, absent this record, would be
   - Does it make sense to harmonize the resulting answers across both
   "black lies" and pre-signed zones?
      - That harmonizing might be advisable and/or necessary in a
      multi-signer universe where one provider is statically signing, and the
      other is dynamically signing

Presumably this would get added to the set of types that must not co-exist
with any other type, and must be singletons.