Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Call for Adoption draft-vixie-dns-rpz

"Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Mon, 13 March 2017 15:07 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.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 50C5D12966C for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:07:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 whU-Nn_qUR6F for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:07:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (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 71894129489 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:07:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.32.60.94] (142-254-101-176.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [142.254.101.176]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id v2DF78wp069503 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:07:10 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 142-254-101-176.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [142.254.101.176] claimed to be [10.32.60.94]
From: "Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:07:19 -0700
Message-ID: <40D4F173-4ACB-4AF6-932C-85FC798240F5@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <677ed378-554b-5129-4f46-c2478696e483@dcrocker.net>
References: <CADyWQ+ETSd199ok0fgh=PB=--hW7buPgSoCg22aK51Bk4xxBmw@mail.gmail.com> <CADyWQ+GUDg2iA+MQ9xjNLDVvRgnd9PD=pLBNNvp0xK3UZVSqTA@mail.gmail.com> <1AD82FB6-735A-4124-A0A3-2158EC567AD6@nohats.ca> <CAHw9_iK+SWiHZwGgHZRO2T1MLVQZS-2BaeZBzyUuZ0iWHX2ZjA@mail.gmail.com> <fa0b1bd1-f7b8-c3bc-58a3-397c1b118370@bogus.com> <alpine.LRH.2.20.999.1703121922250.11053@bofh.nohats.ca> <19668099-d361-5bd5-7efb-2aab92c190e6@bbiw.net> <alpine.LRH.2.20.999.1703130533180.18195@bofh.nohats.ca> <677ed378-554b-5129-4f46-c2478696e483@dcrocker.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.6r5347)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/cEdr77SRkbqudP4hIBTR1CGOJJQ>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Call for Adoption draft-vixie-dns-rpz
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 15:07:24 -0000

On 13 Mar 2017, at 7:44, Dave Crocker wrote:

> On 3/13/2017 4:11 AM, Paul Wouters wrote:
>> The draft breaks DNSSEC.
> ...
>> I have proposed a method that would not change the RPZ response for a
>> non-DNSSEC client, but would add data for DNSSEC capable clients to 
>> be
>
>
> That sounds like an excellent bit of technical enhancement to 
> consider... /after/ documenting /existing/ practice.

Why "after" and not "during"? That is, if the WG document tells how this 
one method of achieving a set of goals works, why not also document 
other options that could have, and might in the future, be adopted? That 
would certainly give the reader more context.

--Paul Hoffman