Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Call for Adoption - draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

Jared Mauch <jared@puck.Nether.net> Thu, 07 September 2017 22:12 UTC

Return-Path: <jared@puck.nether.net>
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 3EEE713235C for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 15:12:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 I0F3p0ggq4pK for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 15:12:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from puck.nether.net (puck.nether.net [204.42.254.5]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C585E13235A for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 15:12:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by puck.nether.net (Postfix, from userid 162) id 71254540D94; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 18:12:41 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2017 18:12:41 -0400
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.Nether.net>
To: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20170907221241.GA1031@puck.nether.net>
References: <CADyWQ+FHDHcmq-mr0BCHS5A8yvaOQmhTjve1_DmZN6vAc=BKyA@mail.gmail.com> <20170907154234.3z2zbju2sciiy7wr@nic.fr> <ybltw0emmvh.fsf@wu.hardakers.net> <8295055.TIQDDEhZcU@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8295055.TIQDDEhZcU@localhost.localdomain>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.0 (2017-09-02)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/_O6fTuGOQ5En2h4Xoi_AB-a1sfc>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Call for Adoption - draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale
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: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 22:12:43 -0000

On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 01:29:47PM -0700, Paul Vixie wrote:
> if the draft being considered was clear on two points, i'd support adoption.
> 
> first, this feature is controversial, and there is not consensus favouring its 
> implementation, merely its documentation.
> 
> second, the initiator must indicate its intent to use data beyond its TTL, and 
> the responder must assent to this, and that otherwise, including in the 
> default case where such signaling is absent, data shall not be used beyond its 
> TTL.

	Would you see the querying application informing you of intent via 
option code saying "If I'm unable to talk to you once TTL expires, I may serve 
your last known good answer"?

	What would a server then do if this intent were known?  serve some
alternate data, or even return REFUSED?  I could see sending a secure notify
to anyone who requested the QNAME after change, but holding this state may
end up with complexity similar to what's some have seen with ECS.

	- Jared


-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.