IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] BULK RR as optional feature

Evan Hunt <each@isc.org> Tue, 28 March 2017 20:51 UTC

Return-Path: <each@isc.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 D44DE1295A0 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 13:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 yZhaUpode4OK for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 13:51:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.pao1.isc.org (mx.pao1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:0:2::2b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8797712955E for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 13:51:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bikeshed.isc.org (bikeshed.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:d::19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.pao1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 620E93493CD; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:51:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix, from userid 10292) id 552C4216C1C; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:51:51 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:51:51 +0000
From: Evan Hunt <each@isc.org>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20170328205151.GB23312@isc.org>
References: <20170328183156.2467.qmail@ary.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170328183156.2467.qmail@ary.lan>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/SkMt-5Dt_rmh9n9v5qu8gEEJQu0>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] BULK RR as optional feature
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: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:51:55 -0000

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 06:31:56PM -0000, John Levine wrote:
> What if such a server receives BULK by AXFR?  By IXFR?

I agree these scenarios in particular need to be specified.

One possible solution would be an EDNS signal indicating whether or not the
secondary server implements BULK. If not, the primary would have to expand
the BULK data during transfer, same as BIND expands $GENERATE.  (I proposed
a similar sort of EDNS signaling mechanism in draft-hunt-note-rr-01 a few
years back.)

-- 
Evan Hunt -- each@isc.org
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status