Re: [DNSOP] ANAME precedence [issue #58]

[神明達哉 <[e-mail]>]

At Fri, 26 Apr 2019 09:16:58 +0200,
Matthijs Mekking <[e-mail]> wrote:

> > Also, especially if both AAAA and A sibling records are available,
> > what's the purpose of ANAME in the first place if it's (effectively)
> > not used?
> >
> > I'm sure I'm just confused and don't understand the expected usage,
> > but I can't figure it out from the available descriptions.  Could you
> > clarify it?
>
> Personally I agree that the purpose of ANAME becomes less useful with
> choice #2.  The difference is that you can set up ANAME for example for
> AAAA only, or for A only. I don't know what the expected usage of that
> is, and that is why I am asking on the list. If it turns out there is no
> useful case, I think we should put text in the draft that says ANAME
> takes precedence over sibling A and AAAA records.

Okay.  In that case I agree we should go for choice #1 (ANAME should
be preferred) unless the expected usage for choice #2 is clarified and
convinces us (the wg).  Choice #2 looks awkward to me especially if we
consider the case where both AAAA and A siblings exist.

According to your original message choice #2 was derived from the
behavior of a particular implementation:

> Jan Včelák mentioned that at least NS1 uses a different order of
> priority: If an sibling address record exists next to the ANAME it takes
> precedence and no target lookup is done for that address record type.

if there's a specific use case where this behavior is important,
either the developer or user of this implementation should be able to
clarify that.  At least until we know that I don't see the point of
considering this choice.

--
JINMEI, Tatuya