Re: [DNSOP] [art] draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf

Petr Špaček <petr.spacek@nic.cz> Mon, 21 August 2017 06:24 UTC

Return-Path: <petr.spacek@nic.cz>
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 6EF2B1320BE for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Aug 2017 23:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nic.cz
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 dCoAkGL1fGaL for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Aug 2017 23:24:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) (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 0964F126B71 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 20 Aug 2017 23:24:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.3.212] (ip4-95-82-146-6.cust.nbox.cz [95.82.146.6]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A568461144 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 08:24:02 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1503296642; bh=L0rTQb0LVOTsJfBzZBaCnPdh3hyv+ymaFz8DXtTXdNI=; h=To:From:Date; b=ag5dDEi/NXm1w6vAlHwDncrKRCr7VaEOpjm5NVDhrBTrdci5He/qA/uDNBqdDbqJ+ C9ah0Gx2KolXcjJbPMJXga3LVSla7+i+UX/1YcuWkivTRxYP+EAvbsXCUCZRMnbW2i d/zp9aC3F/xUGxXTjeKocy9LmJDMKFjA+Tj9RnsI=
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <CADyWQ+HiVOz1zrhNeEYnzy4hryrhFu+v5GNWqcXdOqQBeB9Cig@mail.gmail.com> <9fc7ff7d-9f5a-ce2b-9fb1-e9b1c9eb0108@nostrum.com> <94641677-d072-3462-1c72-ab203c553eef@dcrocker.net> <20170810052443.ltfr4mjskwvwvg3q@mx4.yitter.info>
From: =?UTF-8?B?UGV0ciDFoHBhxI1law==?= <petr.spacek@nic.cz>
Organization: CZ.NIC
Message-ID: <b25f693b-cbc3-b043-7bfb-9fe0f6a6248b@nic.cz>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 08:24:02 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170810052443.ltfr4mjskwvwvg3q@mx4.yitter.info>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at mail
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/XZaIjYfPgjDIUqF4nwVg26Qsi2E>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [art] draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf
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: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 06:24:05 -0000


On 10.8.2017 07:24, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 03:36:24PM -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:
> 
>> deal with that fully, in a single spec produced an especially confused
>> draft, roughly 10 years ago.
> 
> I _think_ I may be one of the people who complained at the time, and
> if I recall correctly what Dave and I agreed about (maybe the only
> thing) was that this was all a terrible mess that needed repair.  At
> the time, I was still too much in thrall to data-theoretic approaches
> to give in on Dave's pragmatic answer.  And I now see that Dave has
> actually described better than I was ever able my objection:
> 
>> I've come to the conclusion that "accommodating" the established
>> registration practices is a fundamentally wrong path.  The only way to solve
>> a problem of multiple registration authorities is to create a single
>> registration authority.
> 
> Yes.
> 
>>    1. Have this document define the simple, sole, authoritative mechanism
>> for registering "top-level" (global scope) underscore names.
>>
>>    2. Create a separate document that specifies modifications to the SRV and
>> URI documents, rationalizing the use of underscore names, through the
>> mechanism defined in -attrleaf-.
> 
> I like this approach.

Definitelly!

-- 
Petr Špaček  @  CZ.NIC