Re: [DNSOP] RFC 1035 vs. mandatory NS at apex?

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Fri, 08 February 2019 01:09 UTC

Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
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 1D45B1277D2 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 17:09:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 3El2mSftO9Oi for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 17:09:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm1-x334.google.com (mail-wm1-x334.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::334]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B5D9C1274D0 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 17:09:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm1-x334.google.com with SMTP id t200so1801928wmt.0 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Feb 2019 17:09:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=E6qV/GlMne7nhQIHgpJgBw3hF4X8U0E0YpM7U2Xjuhw=; b=fmb7X0XLJE6tq4U1ZHrqUKogKj4XUXwgMnFwVEiCMry6fBpHVUkN87ndw567pxzb/R CQ/zPZV/qCvBZIaJChyZ6tdau0beTmRO6d78BWLVYoJBmGL8nMC+0rZmxWypVDKcM2nK hmhox/M+AmJDmMigzzO7HAFS67IusvcgB564nMQlYR0OY5yUUwY+GQKe4ToAZtaEfX9R SnDeQQJ1Cwg0TJkqsahSqWQa+c2ceOIrgndq2EauuYMpW+BCk5yFzKnXA24XQlASuGpq qe4ZDEHWX+wPJCez919nVTaJ6trXuzpNUS+lvxQxy0ZFvaAYqdTfBfXVGoSjyLt0VavY LEIw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=E6qV/GlMne7nhQIHgpJgBw3hF4X8U0E0YpM7U2Xjuhw=; b=UGjghk/H9cnFxxLgsWJFORKvO9uuXlfepDrtFhDsVTs+bScfMcCdOA6uRnwq1yINt2 tfWtmSErFzN6+zJ/fIVTjEWNNYSMvJkTZKlBNvAB1Butff5sZpRC+lsi7tddZE8Goq5A 86JT0hGtph63LWsMw2MZTAbpbLgRyG3Gw9cGlWmsymlHc7Gow6g8aZBpIUL9lFaZZEx6 X6yzpnITYwb9e0IWNoh/OeIk8C/a8StkMwNiol26QnkRl2ntA0Fb5L+6l/Yixj4aKyz7 mJgAQiUyTEpV9hkuhMSB0tFSKDPD4kFEZVZ73kC5tvDa5DjdoZG4hNUWeDlvpgL0nwv2 ZTAQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAub/TgCKHsKYGArD+sSCmRI05SbV87mPrAr6oxrV30QLJ4fSkqT6 R6Wii0K3KHVI1J/iRsp9aJIdZV318l3a3SHuGt2weQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IbEWQgsA3yaxwjbKIxdTYrBivPUEkEMUdgkwfAwccRj2MjRM+u0wmaMihq78GeD7D1o7FDqKWEgwxSVF/UQvbk=
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:f605:: with SMTP id w5mr9807887wmc.116.1549588188873; Thu, 07 Feb 2019 17:09:48 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <fcd790a2-414b-491e-01e2-9aa92f7b1c4e@nic.cz> <CAAeHe+xySnrvpD4-nhi3T0qiEmz8h0ZNUE_2kie7ctq8YPGRPA@mail.gmail.com> <56839e19-afe9-df4b-d432-09a949cc658c@nic.cz> <06E02AB3-5E3B-4E1F-9B23-BB0810F73B66@fugue.com> <CA+nkc8BLA1wVSQ6DEbM7py98Rq94P-=XJtEBzcJAD9LOucN2Ew@mail.gmail.com> <8a7a70e4-7214-c127-8542-0131bbc823bc@nic.cz> <dc68fa90-0d4c-b9d6-09cb-eec55b9f9077@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <F3F51C9A-B174-40CF-A79F-332DF7E66798@isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <F3F51C9A-B174-40CF-A79F-332DF7E66798@isc.org>
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 20:09:12 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iJ0+9r3etFjDObWjEe1wLawxKWYB4ThmWtoqv_rZoWU8A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Cc: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008be4e00581579db5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/Uj6UkkD4NSgV1FX14rz6lApfkSc>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] RFC 1035 vs. mandatory NS at apex?
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 08 Feb 2019 01:09:53 -0000

On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 6:42 PM Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:

>
>
> > On 8 Feb 2019, at 10:28 am, Masataka Ohta <
> mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
> >
> > Petr Spacek wrote:
> >
> >> Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC1035 (5626)
> >
> > I don't think errata is necessary.
>
> Neither do I.
>
> >>    5. At least one NS RR must be present at the top of the zone.
> >
> > At least two.
>
> And address records for the name servers at top of zone MUST exist.
> if the names are in zone.  Similarly GLUE records must exist for
> delegating NS records if they are below bottom of zone.  There
> are a whole heap of checks that can be performed when you load
> a zone.
>
> That list was clearly not intended to be exhaustive.  Constructing
> and getting consensus over a exhaustive list is likely to take
> months.
>

Ok, fair.
I'll do "Hold for Document Update":
"Hold for Document Update - The erratum is not a necessary update to the
RFC. However, any future update of the document might consider this
erratum, and determine whether it is correct and merits including in the
update. "

If people read the errata they will see it listed.
W



>
> Mark
>
> >                                               Masataka Ohta
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > DNSOP mailing list
> > DNSOP@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>
> --
> Mark Andrews, ISC
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742              INTERNET: marka@isc.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>


-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in
the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of
pants.
   ---maf