Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-huston-kskroll-sentinel-04.txt

George Michaelson <> Wed, 31 January 2018 03:56 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C755A12FB54 for <>; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 19:56:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JPogREYkJgnS for <>; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 19:56:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAACF1314B7 for <>; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 19:56:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id b76so13077051qkc.1 for <>; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 19:56:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TEOqapPw8ql2H6/7OFWVPFwbUJAWhbsPGfJBJiZQgf4=; b=OYlHT7bSWg1Qw3FYBaqbiw10drYRLQmE1lyK2cgfb5icco1uhC7RuBrI5hc8QsZLc5 RG98RB5nDCNRK9SVzPfHV7C6G3RRJoySvr2oDpJQkixZYadOB0Jwvl1FzJLFH13GK/4z 1hriI1wmOf+uKp1DBAhdswDg7EoMTyrssfPPiD0rurW9IBkU5UG5rtkEA4V55gBTMApR dHQIX3eofKhFJz9PHiIK5z5WY1TlvK8b53BS3rTzsAYDMg32viIVXLEKoqGhRwDvXZwi kbSbE5vVOfeGgc+MMhVJaT1xq1Rw8aQvWBJdW7IiqXsAO9jFH6T15zwvyTMpqjN3fiPA m8+g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TEOqapPw8ql2H6/7OFWVPFwbUJAWhbsPGfJBJiZQgf4=; b=WNDVKjmy3b75yYaLwN5ckEuPz63C0XSFhkvPhDeQpwvW18DVPtUDnk+HqjI2TLOfly ejLH00h/E6oMuoWi2EpPvBxpzZSBSHNNejUtR8aDDFvBVLOJRaiS2XnuVU562tD/haUO 6GHJyqKVn7dWZbKzxoKZg4nYdQIANOzVlttZCKRMDzeBxfeRftDoTgynfjfBJcaW+JMk VEMpIM/YOTbJ296djQkKp8xJJSmYU7NWWtE2yhGSkNYN/Cmpr0gEP7ECmpllDOEOyL23 lk2lL07ppsUyFlu+es/g+m9PYohkXm+NWmZhUdsdpEQGZBR5imVW9y84bkIA2c+FW5eE CNQw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytdaAb0ZTmNA+2C6ZpihXo2LiPs+Z0iLYc4B/anXMGsOGVguFfy8 wpIuc0r6YBpni39a3CtOaZYPFnPeqp2cO/zCZBVIw0uz
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x224Pza1Ny0fawGlj0nCFdHxi2y787NSc7vK/CJmOqCmXG6Gf5TFzGEYE2a3JCDe5EiuMjym7lQAT1id945dvLBg=
X-Received: by with SMTP id r78mr46180558qki.356.1517370996729; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 19:56:36 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 19:56:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Originating-IP: [2001:dc0:2001:210:b1bd:7ad4:f7b9:9677]
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: George Michaelson <>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 13:56:36 +1000
Message-ID: <>
To: Joe Abley <>
Cc: Paul Hoffman <>, dnsop WG <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-huston-kskroll-sentinel-04.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 03:56:40 -0000

I stress, I'm not an author on this one. I'm also heavily biassed by
role and relationship(s) with the authors.

I'm trying to play nice, in that context: I want it shipped. I think
its a net useful contribution.

So, I think your suggestion of guiding words is good. If it was my
draft, I'd welcome them.

But... its not my draft.

I guess .. its "all of us's draft" now. So.. hells yea. Write words.


On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Joe Abley <> wrote:
> Hi George,
> On Jan 30, 2018, at 21:49, George Michaelson <> wrote:
>>> The problem you hit was in BIND. To get around it, you simply add "check-names master warn;" to the options.
>> And with this.. he was good again. So, modulo the implementation
>> cost/consequence, I'm good here.
>> But, if this is detail, then I'm back at 10,000ft: noting the IETF is
>> all about detail, are we mostly good here?
>> Because.. I really want this closed off.
> I like it, and I am keen for it to be implemented. I dislike Warren's compromise on xm-- for all the reasons Paul mentioned (but also "oh my god no, please no" just on general principles). I would like it to proceed so we can see the kind of swift implementation that will teach us something about the DNS.
> I made a comment some time ago in response to someone's (Warren's again, I think, but I'm not sure) observed confusion in others about the draft. I recall that I suggested that the draft include some explicit advice for all the various actors here (resolver implementers, zone managers) so that it was more clear who was doing what.
> I'm stil willing to contribute text if anybody cares, since I seem to remember feeling correct about that observation, and I don't *think* I have noticed a rev of the draft since then, but I also didn't notice any other people say anything like that and I'm perfectly willing to be overwhelmed by the silent majority or to have a more recent revision pointed out to me with the patience normally reserved for the young and the dangerously insane.
> Joe