Re: [DNSOP] [homenet] WGLC on "redact" and "homenet-dot"

Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Thu, 22 December 2016 03:53 UTC

Return-Path: <marka@isc.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 A1B38129452 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 19:53:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 V0K4Z9jeUf7c for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 19:53:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ams1.isc.org (mx.ams1.isc.org [199.6.1.65]) (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 9B8A512940F for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 19:53:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org (zmx1.isc.org [149.20.0.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.ams1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E57DD1FCAC3; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 03:53:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AA5E16004F; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 03:53:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D457160053; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 03:53:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zmx1.isc.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id hWWz8HJ2tdMl; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 03:53:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from rock.dv.isc.org (c27-253-115-14.carlnfd2.nsw.optusnet.com.au [27.253.115.14]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E6BAB16004F; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 03:53:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from rock.dv.isc.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rock.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0398F5D45463; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 14:53:10 +1100 (EST)
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
References: <9fe0e34d-51e9-bdf3-a650-d8b3681f1cd8@bellis.me.uk> <CAPt1N1=Z2xERw68-=iFGgYYnEO3eDW-8tvhmTmaf4+vU-24grQ@mail.gmail.com> <C059877D829F76429F49E0B48705D888F7FD2C7B@EXCH-01.CORP.CIRA.CA> <4A870505-070B-4065-B360-5A98485E4CEB@fugue.com> <313759CF-B72F-401D-BA26-79C214C30686@shinkuro.com> <8D7E8E5C-EC8E-46E9-9C07-947D7A7F69E3@fugue.com> <61ebc3c3-557a-1be8-7205-648e1e83411c@nthpermutation.com> <3E04D8BB-D18F-4D9B-81C3-991BCF76FBE7@fugue.com> <C059877D829F76429F49E0B48705D888F7FD3D67@EXCH-01.CORP.CIRA.CA> <CAPt1N1=sja40SS9_TyFV9vqASXTd1j-vMC+A31ggjG=-vU0W2g@mail.gmail.com> <20161221203113.5j2d5spv6ro5dwhi@nic.fr> <DBB262AE-2F0E-4C63-A202-B53E0A6C9061@fugue.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 21 Dec 2016 17:13:31 -0500." <DBB262AE-2F0E-4C63-A202-B53E0A6C9061@fugue.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 14:53:09 +1100
Message-Id: <20161222035310.0398F5D45463@rock.dv.isc.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/eC8Z2J2NPBmV343dqJhmBO3JZok>
Cc: Jacques Latour <jacques.latour@cira.ca>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>, Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [homenet] WGLC on "redact" and "homenet-dot"
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: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 03:53:20 -0000

In message <DBB262AE-2F0E-4C63-A202-B53E0A6C9061@fugue.com>, Ted Lemon writes:
>
> On Dec 21, 2016, at 3:31 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
> wrote:
> > What did we publish on classes? If you refer to
> > draft-sullivan-dns-class-useless, it was never published (which is
> > bad).
>
> That’s what I was referring to.   It was so obviously the right thing
> that it never occurred to me that it hadn’t been published.

Truely there is nothing in draft-sullivan-dns-class-useless which
says we should abandon the ability to use classes in the future.

The only thing we need to do now is to stop making type allocations
type independent by default.  Everything else is addressable in the
future when we decide we need to use a new class.

By default all new type allocations are IN only.  You need to make
the case that a type needs to be class independent or a class other
than IN.  A simple update to IANA's instructions on type allocations
would fix that.

In reality we have allocated a very small percentage of types and
having a few being class independent which didn't need to be shouldn't
be a reason to break future use of classes.

Just because we have not used classes much, because there has been
no need to date, doesn't mean that we should abandon the ability.

Mark
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka@isc.org