Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf

Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net> Fri, 06 July 2018 15:39 UTC

Return-Path: <dcrocker@bbiw.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 146A113104F for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Jul 2018 08:39:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.79
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.79 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=bbiw.net
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 NJiNL1sm3Yu1 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Jul 2018 08:39:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (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 957B913104A for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Jul 2018 08:39:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.8.128]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id w66Ffli5029550 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 6 Jul 2018 08:41:47 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=bbiw.net; s=default; t=1530891708; bh=7qZ+OFeZqTdv3vLZqZskM/Da9sdJLJvS8od4kjpcfYE=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=SB8duoJtYpaBFTE5ypFVdb9Ye5hXKFr/KyTv7WlZ8tKOSiw0WBUmgKwuQ6sCOoCMs F8MqGg06yXJURvsv8jYi+DveaHH8hSOGOYMjKJCHnPnstIuVA5SWO9+2ltRzsmMuvM ODnBirzDe5Xb3WCTaGrcsocmeph/0tkcPrY1EETc=
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>, Benno Overeinder <benno@NLnetLabs.nl>
Cc: DNSOP WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
References: <60eb1c1a-5a3a-5908-27c1-7b3cf587eb14@NLnetLabs.nl> <20180706152250.n7242t2holox6bgq@nic.fr>
From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <349edb95-48ff-41a2-4cda-1c9ed44f7c63@bbiw.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2018 08:39:14 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180706152250.n7242t2holox6bgq@nic.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/aIpwvSL1KJJjqLGErQf8XmHUdcU>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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: Fri, 06 Jul 2018 15:39:23 -0000

Stephane, thanks for the comments.

Inline...

On 7/6/2018 8:22 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 12:27:17PM +0200,
>   Benno Overeinder <benno@NLnetLabs.nl> wrote
>   a message of 27 lines which said:
> 
>> This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf
> 
> I've read -10 and it seems OK. It solves a real issue, and does it
> properly.
> 
> Editorial: I would prefer all occurrences of "right-most" to be
> replaced by "most general", to emphasize that it is not the position
> which matters, it is the closeness to the root.



So let's start by making sure we're seeking the same goal:  reader 
comprehension.  While I can imagine there is phrasing that is better 
than right-most, to achieve that comprehension, I believe 'most general' 
isn't it.  My impression has been that 'right-most' is the most common 
phrasing people have used over the years.


> Editorial: 'that is they are the "top" of a DNS branch, under a
> "parent" domain name.' I assume that "top" is used instead of "apex"
> because the sentence does not always refer to the top of a zone?

'zone' is almost certainly not the term to apply here.  While it 
encompasses a sub-tree, its boundary is not explicit in a domain name.

The DNS is a hierarchy.  I would have though 'top of a sub-branch' was 
therefore clear, concise and accurate.  Again, if there is other 
phrasing that is more established, we should use it.  But I'm not used 
to seeing 'apex', though it's certainly a more erudite choice...

d/


-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net