Re: [DNSOP] The DNSOP WG has placed draft-woodworth-bulk-rr in state "Candidate for WG Adoption"

"Peter van Dijk" <> Fri, 21 July 2017 23:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB0241243F3 for <>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:59:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LHXLMnjq9bnU for <>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:59:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a01:1b0:202:40::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 166B3126B7E for <>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:59:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: peter) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C24B61BD15; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 01:58:59 +0200 (CEST)
From: "Peter van Dijk" <>
To: "dnsop WG" <>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 01:58:59 +0200
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <A05B583C828C614EBAD1DA920D92866BD081E686@PODCWMBXEX501.ctl.intranet>
References: <> <> <> <> <A05B583C828C614EBAD1DA920D92866BD081C441@PODCWMBXEX501.ctl.intranet> <> <A05B583C828C614EBAD1DA920D92866BD081E686@PODCWMBXEX501.ctl.intranet>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.6r5347)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] The DNSOP WG has placed draft-woodworth-bulk-rr in state "Candidate for WG Adoption"
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 23:59:04 -0000

Hello John,

On 20 Jul 2017, at 3:17, Woodworth, John R wrote:

> Although in practice the name would likely be shorter and potentially
> include other customer attributes,
> say
>    1. This shows the owner is, customer acmewabbit
>    2. Reverse lookups are helpful for tools (e.g. traceroute)
>       and logs.

1 and 2 could be covered with a wildcard PTR, as I think Tony Finch 
pointed out.

> Forget for a moment about IPv6.  This draft makes $GENERATE more
> memory efficient, scales bigger, stays intact through AXFR's
> and yes -it makes some nameservers (authoritative) work a bit more
> as a trade-off.

One could make $GENERATE more efficient without actually implementing 
the BULK RR, by taking your pattern matching logic and implementing it 
inside the name server. Of course, this makes generating the NSEC/NSEC3 
chain much harder than it is with today’s $GENERATE implementations 
that actually generate all the names.

A very interesting puzzle would be implementing BULK support, based on 
the pattern matching in the draft, -without- doing NSEC(3) white/black 
lies - i.e. generating the widest possible NSEC instead of the narrowest 
one. For NSEC3 I suspect this is not feasible.

Kind regards,
Peter van Dijk