Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel-07

It’s not only that - however unbelievable it might seems, but we also have tests (and variable names) and I do believe the things should be consistent for future generations.

Ondrej
--
Ondřej Surý
ondrej@isc.org

> On 23 Mar 2018, at 12:08, George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org> wrote:
> 
> isn't it a #define string? or passed in via environment from configure?
> 
> -G
> 
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 23 Mar 2018, at 10:08 pm, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 10:07 AM, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
>>>> Geoff you are wrong. Titles should tell you what you are about
>>>> to read especially technical documents. There are WAY TOO MANY
>>>> RFC TO READ EVERYONE ON THEM.
>>> 
>>> ... you lack ambition :-P
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> If I had a TA for andrews.wattle.id.au the current title would
>>>> indicate that I could test resolvers to see if there is a TA
>>>> installed for it.
>>>> 
>>>> The current draft *is not* generic.  It is root TA specific.
>>>> That needs to be reflected in the title.
>>>> 
>>>> As for the label it can be used for more than rolling KSKs.
>>>> It can be used to see what resolvers are supporting new TA
>>>> *when you are not rolling keys*.  The current name reflects
>>>> *one* use, not all uses.
>>> 
>>> True, it does reflect one use case, not all -- however, we have
>>> already changed the name multiple times and implementers are
>>> (understandably) becoming annoyed, and supporting N different labels
>>> for the tester is also annoying [0].
>> 
>> As an implementer I say TOUGH!  The job of the working group is to
>> put out good specifications not to take short cuts just because
>> something has been implemented based on a draft.  This is the expected
>> cost of implementing on a draft.  I’ve re-written plenty of code to
>> follow draft changes.
>> 
>> I’ve got code to implement this.  Some corner cases are currently
>> undefined. Changing the label name will cause me to have to re-write
>> parts of what I have already written.  I know this but I’m still
>> calling for the changes.  Not only will the specific labels change
>> but potentially configuration arguments and with that documentation.
>> 
>>> How about a compromise - we update the draft name, but keep the label
>>> the same - the only people who likely care about the label are
>>> implementers and testers - once someone sees the name they will read
>>> the doc and quickly discover how it can be used.
>>> 
>>> W
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Mark
>>>> 
>>>>> On 23 Mar 2018, at 8:21 pm, Geoff Huston <gih@apnic.net> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 23 Mar 2018, at 12:55 am, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This title of this document DOES NOT match reality.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "A Sentinel for Detecting Trusted Keys in DNSSEC” should be
>>>>>> replaced by “A Root Key Trust Anchor Sentinel for DNSSEC”.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> kskroll-sentinel-<what>-<id> really needs something other
>>>>>> than “kskroll” as the first field.  “root-key-sentinal-<what>-<id>”
>>>>>> really more clearly matches what it does.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Any other changes that follow from these two changes”
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I personally think this is getting into bike shedding at this point.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The title of the document is an adequate description of the content
>>>>> and folk who want to know more should read the document, not guess
>>>>> from the title!
>>>>> 
>>>>> The label is a piece of syntactic convenience and is entirely
>>>>> arbitrary. We could start an almost infinite discussion thread
>>>>> over which label is better, but in the end its just a label.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>>  Geoff
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Mark Andrews, ISC
>>>> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
>>>> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742              INTERNET: marka@isc.org
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> DNSOP mailing list
>>>> DNSOP@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
>>> idea in the first place.
>>> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
>>> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
>>> of pants.
>>>  ---maf
>> 
>> --
>> Mark Andrews, ISC
>> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
>> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742              INTERNET: marka@isc.org
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> DNSOP mailing list
>> DNSOP@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop