Re: [DNSOP] Where in a CNAME chain is the QNAME?

"Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Thu, 29 September 2016 15:15 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.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 0E28F12B16C for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 08:15:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 3zAJ9D7Ep-6l for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 08:15:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (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 D722012B16F for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 08:15:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.32.60.90] (50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id u8TFF6Jx015559 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 29 Sep 2016 08:15:07 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230] claimed to be [10.32.60.90]
From: "Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
To: "Robert Edmonds" <edmonds@mycre.ws>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 08:15:07 -0700
Message-ID: <FB65DFDB-BF69-4560-A5C5-B7BF3D57DA64@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20160929150143.q337eazfubz2act4@mycre.ws>
References: <20160920161350.GA3288@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <20160923082232.6j2jlr4wqp2fxs56@nic.fr> <2C1851F8-E4D4-402D-9F0A-2C37D40167B0@kahlerlarson.org> <20160928213259.GE4192@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <20160929055005.ritosc5cxnds6iyx@mycre.ws> <5ECA97D4-2753-4078-880A-17AE11AC97BA@vpnc.org> <20160929150143.q337eazfubz2act4@mycre.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.5r5263)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/VG1vk0D3AU3ewbqz4PKhIjDUyVY>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Where in a CNAME chain is the QNAME?
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 15:15:12 -0000

On 29 Sep 2016, at 8:01, Robert Edmonds wrote:

> Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> Oddly, "owner name" is correct here. From RFC 1035, Section 3.2.1 which
>> describes the format of resource records:
>
> Compare that section to the nearly identical §4.1.3, which replaces this
> sentence:
>
>     All RRs have the same top level format shown below:
>
> with:
>
>     The answer, authority, and additional sections all share the same
>     format: a variable number of resource records, where the number of
>     records is specified in the corresponding count field in the header.
>     Each resource record has the following format:
>
> But, the "All RRs" part of §3.2.1 is still accurate, because an entry in
> the question section is not a RR.
>
> There are some other differences between §3.2.1 and §4.1.3, for instance
> §3 uses "owner name" while §4 uses "domain name" to describe the NAME
> field, and the infamous signed vs. unsigned definition of the TTL field.

Yes, I see that now. N'r mind...

--Paul Hoffman