Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-andrews-dnsop-glue-is-not-optional

Shumon Huque <> Thu, 21 May 2020 16:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D635B3A0404; Thu, 21 May 2020 09:10:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 50Hdqo3rJgvA; Thu, 21 May 2020 09:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B7923A053E; Thu, 21 May 2020 09:10:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id a2so9444817ejb.10; Thu, 21 May 2020 09:10:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gpg2TG/hvZmLbs6ESI6EGOcOKqma07uPenvqmSMsqVs=; b=NhKRDBaZsNV0e8EXGWML5q3ZZjuxNIIjf4ClHbKaGhSPf+9ACjn3eb7VRa2GV0CRJb p1E//7QVY4xbFktWdhXl/4aHvQDdFDAfaWsVV6s+GrsxL3sDp8bqAYAylVyKuNuRy3Ty E35UmAp8lxJFSbmItz5ACdTLr+/pXddzegnCoIyMuL0y/7ELR/G9+/7vYNP6UdHBJoZW oZnV2Qu2Bh9Uxccmd8q6s2udf1mgbIY7wH6B0q7FpO9U3O2mfPjE1+seEvsY8Klzp/rW Zr1vZNver1GfQyTAA+iwvK25Lnt/DGgXZsq0UTXuq7uNmnKym9VyDx7nHmajI2j0X3UA EwDw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gpg2TG/hvZmLbs6ESI6EGOcOKqma07uPenvqmSMsqVs=; b=ag4m1Oi8wmKcCZulrzA40ObXHqU9ZE9P0gkoCdFpm2iy3dwbU00VBTz35HKl6zr4px A9BAC6I1x1gRNZ2Cj2aWJpN42eAsfcZmtBVRYmd7fH4tg0weAj7EjFJDqC5qsxBG9sXt LrlZHVBUK38as3hPl0/PwayH26yEw0OGU3tV2aGX6hgDrZtdUSOu/nb32QBwjF0oIuFB R+ASPx+wybzXjA3hsyZ3qJycHrQxPvx6VxyOxanLkVInre2EcEmU3qz5D7S+gpKsl0Hj P8GGz2MDkgygBU8uduprJBu84q+y6wHxLZqntseXXRpJ5xH3vtJ/EeCLbtoSW1Vgnzbm 4CNQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530tYi5skBQFzFP3CBFD1DUh5nkeGbcV1fQ0/mY7y4AaHw40Hoay I7jfteXQOZtjSX/tqGqepO2fsd8jAqXquDSSf2rYIw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwGG+afYDlyyttDQucr4JhVsD8h8dPDoFC4PPpHb+7uO+9tAyGgWfzJh4BibJYKknYuYnyAauxYyxb9pKY3u9Y=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:57d6:: with SMTP id u22mr4231033ejr.49.1590077404644; Thu, 21 May 2020 09:10:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Shumon Huque <>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 12:09:52 -0400
Message-ID: <>
To: Tim Wicinski <>
Cc: dnsop <>, dnsop-chairs <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000de8a4005a62abecb"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-andrews-dnsop-glue-is-not-optional
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 16:10:10 -0000

On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 1:50 PM Tim Wicinski <> wrote:

> All,
> As we stated in the meeting and in our chairs actions, we're going to run
> regular call for adoptions over next few months.
> We are looking for *explicit* support for adoption.
> This starts a Call for Adoption for
> draft-andrews-dnsop-glue-is-not-optional
> The draft is available here:
> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption
> by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.
> Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.
> This call for adoption ends: 1 June 2020

I've read the draft. It's a useful clarification to the spec, so I support
adoption and will review etc.

I have one question for the Mark A though:

Since you specifically cite the example of the GOV servers, did you ask
Verisign about this behavior, and if so, what was their response? Maybe
this is just a bug, rather than a "widespread misbelief" about additional
data & truncation that you more generally attribute as the cause for this.