IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Clarifying referrals (#35)

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Wed, 29 November 2017 21:24 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
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 DD12C1270A7 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:24:41 -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, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=C1fgtLYf; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=kH+2vE2p
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 ygaE5C7I_UVA for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:24:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx4.yitter.info (mx4.yitter.info [159.203.56.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 039F51200CF for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:24:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46EE4BD337 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:23:56 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1511990636; bh=afwgjNzXQaUzPvvk+nRo1Do5VW/OPCCG3974KIvg6zg=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=C1fgtLYft77Q/AczBOAieKnkNEW6UtsVZm2WcAAoV8uQGi6y7LejpevoadK26UCiP l7e9HqpyoE8k/nexVFeE/HEvHOOjPSkWnw9Nm0XApgLVa4Yk6KVKPTm/ZR3rx1Fstm nDYxLFU8ok4RZkDXVWmWhWuaAsLjoU0LAN0Jgj/Y=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca
Received: from mx4.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx4.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7ZpByNLtNfuo for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:23:55 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 16:23:54 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1511990634; bh=afwgjNzXQaUzPvvk+nRo1Do5VW/OPCCG3974KIvg6zg=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=kH+2vE2psFcbEFcfTlLek6y5VnkFW17yyiWPrkvm2h9kM5Z/gZKFfxp37uXpx4pN/ WZmyH17U/2oHV8NPhkBBEm2iqrLWIyRnym/ka4CVi5KkU2DJ/SHRPwZl+wqrdKUK5o +uQdMasRtQGDbukz0YxV6IHOzRY8dd7yxJ/1iX6A=
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20171129212354.vu4zmki3pi3qnhzz@mx4.yitter.info>
References: <20171128195025.ifzwsjk42wz7ard6@mx4.yitter.info> <FAA4A6D6-1454-4705-B87F-1FB96CC50658@isc.org> <20171129014436.sx546yjwvobepnyp@mx4.yitter.info> <8E36C30A-A7BC-4908-BE06-6D2B8B469006@isc.org> <20171129015303.kthpahbi6w6m645d@mx4.yitter.info> <AE976F3F-0270-4484-BCE4-FE0E9BF9D03E@isc.org> <20171129020347.b3zq3rcwsubmrlhh@mx4.yitter.info> <476FF2A7-DB80-40B6-917A-2675497DD6FC@isc.org> <20171129121706.4zh4kgx3wmtucmpc@mx4.yitter.info> <CAKW6Ri4T1h0n2r-Zp5xUUvW4n+u4oFPww2SDRnqwQMBF_wjY0g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAKW6Ri4T1h0n2r-Zp5xUUvW4n+u4oFPww2SDRnqwQMBF_wjY0g@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/UnQRCSN4dHR4vpsrpk3ue3c8Dws>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Clarifying referrals (#35)
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: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:24:42 -0000

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 09:18:39PM +0000, Dick Franks wrote:
> 
> And said referral could be to an arbitrary node in the DNS tree,  i.e.
> possibly "upward"?
> 
> Or am I missing something?

That depends on whether you believe the later part of the algorithm in
RFC 1034 (where it says to do things from the cache) is part of the
"referral" part, particularly in a mixed-mode server where it has
received a query with RD=0.  The list appears to have strong feelings
about that.  It's why Joe and I wrote draft-sullivan-dnsop-refer-down.

As I've said many times, I don't believe that settling that question
is appropriate for the terminology document.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status