Re: [DNSOP] Fundamental ANAME problems

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Sun, 04 November 2018 08:05 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.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 D83C9130E07 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 01:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 NfohSdZQL9NX for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 01:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [24.104.150.213]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04489127133 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 01:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.29.176] (unknown [12.169.103.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D496F892C6; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 08:05:51 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <5BDEA85E.409@redbarn.org>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2018 01:05:50 -0700
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 5.0.25 (Windows/20180328)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>
CC: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <CAH1iCirXYsYB3sAo8f1Jy-q4meLmQAPSFO-7x5idDufdT_unXQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+nkc8C6yVT62cW5QP-ec2ZT7FY_n48Ecr=CLeE6FS_1duBO8g@mail.gmail.com> <CAJhMdTOwU88BkukodL_zXcK1=JenExX4HL46Zzbw=+btLbDG2A@mail.gmail.com> <20181103193258.GE20885@besserwisser.org> <3E93AE5D-C8AC-496E-85DB-57E6F8E92DF5@frobbit.se> <00158263-85dd-69ce-5299-13ff4c2411c5@bellis.me.uk>
In-Reply-To: <00158263-85dd-69ce-5299-13ff4c2411c5@bellis.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/XxEr2iJIp2xps5-dLlb2XheQZOA>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Fundamental ANAME problems
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: Sun, 04 Nov 2018 08:05:53 -0000


Ray Bellis wrote:
> > ... "URI RR" ...
>
> I see absolutely zero chance of the web community embracing this.

as evidenced by RFC 8484, the web community seems to regret basing their 
work on the Internet System, and is now moving independently. this may 
mean that offering them something like "HTTP RR" which can't work better 
than SRV or URI already works, because they speciously refuse to embrace 
these working technologies, will buy you nothing.

-- 
P Vixie