Re: [DNSOP] [EXT] Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7686 (6761)

Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> Mon, 29 November 2021 20:24 UTC

Return-Path: <jabley@hopcount.ca>
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 F2A7B3A08FD for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 12:24:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=hopcount.ca
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 Bfcd_NkGh-ir for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 12:24:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x829.google.com (mail-qt1-x829.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::829]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F02803A08F9 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 12:24:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x829.google.com with SMTP id j17so17911266qtx.2 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 12:24:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopcount.ca; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=ZoWoL4lFGqJTXyWnI9P042uz8/34ZBCVHVuDbJYy6Kg=; b=XJ4jzhAjKmP8o1Mod2x2+TfomSIR4CfC/Va8vnkEgRmWQtRTXYjhmxN8VE9CbzsbCz TXTMZl5lrRrU7e/30F37g6TjgfofeY7aPhAcX7stMbaTx9uCAvWzHEl1jQ7QZfH/FgNs 00MsGqLDvOoTzBHKw+ath9OEnaJuEjofYFOUA=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=ZoWoL4lFGqJTXyWnI9P042uz8/34ZBCVHVuDbJYy6Kg=; b=UMvh9LiJx5jVVXsll5M4SUDi07rfVocOIpVgtaDmJmvfhmnneRaBoHtI/K/N88HNpn 9LPx8QwFoHQ0Smht4xuQlQ8eQh4EjGOfKNjJkK9wM1Jwq75jsH0W/I672bzMLYLIiNUs o8Q8ReHaJ7RtIdM6XP8J5xh7CeY+ssktQnwgW7VvSu/i02qzKZZtqWIl32QPg/T+M9Q4 5t673TLDwmeWSDvK+uaOFKanHzJmuOw030H6vyPbOD+tU+nFVfcFkAf7ts4D/f7PgHos JT9wHK718YajP8l+OfOFM0GL4/wtVGRiFrM0s75Tix9fcoNITtaZMCItT4ofvsYNiEW1 YWmw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530KmGG+DBCq9WsdnQBGhSpuBj0+FbAtpK9Wkl6mSTJ72LD6EyCq AUbwi29f9eNFb1j7JFnSVdE5/w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzstMpkYFkWPLevHo5njB2YkXD7N4dqcTXhXt7WuMZnjhsQ3bGb75nXGY+ULAgDAYPZKpZMbw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:45:: with SMTP id y5mr39452208qtw.610.1638217466854; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 12:24:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2607:f2c0:e784:c7:4d66:cc6f:a9f3:1296]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bp18sm8822834qkb.39.2021.11.29.12.24.25 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 29 Nov 2021 12:24:25 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_3265DAC0-3747-4347-9254-AE7B1B40893C"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.20.0.1.32\))
From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
In-Reply-To: <F2B9DBB7-9BBA-4C86-953C-1488A05E079D@icann.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 15:24:24 -0500
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <7264AD2D-FD39-4A63-BBA7-E009214D0B5A@hopcount.ca>
References: <20211129190711.E4E9B36417@rfc-editor.org> <19c96ba9-a582-a24-b73-8e86a08c7b68@nohats.ca> <794d45f4b9093a019b94aee4730161d358b5ba79.camel@powerdns.com> <198228F8-F970-47E3-8690-5B13FB324231@hopcount.ca> <F2B9DBB7-9BBA-4C86-953C-1488A05E079D@icann.org>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.20.0.1.32)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/f7qD9etQ5ijP5j1ol19Dz84dpWk>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [EXT] Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7686 (6761)
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 29 Nov 2021 20:24:34 -0000

On 29 Nov 2021, at 14:56, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org> wrote:

> On Nov 29, 2021, at 11:48 AM, Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> wrote:
>> The idea of modifying the protocol to accommodate namespaces outside the DNS is causing me to throw up in my mouth a bit, to be honest. Perhaps the DNS could just concentrate on being the DNS and other namespaces can fight their own battles?
> 
> This bit of wrong text originates with RFC 6761:
>   5.  Authoritative DNS Servers:
> 
>       Are developers of authoritative domain name servers expected to
>       make their implementations recognize these names as special and
>       treat them differently?  If so, how?
> 
> [...]
> 
> #5 explicitly talks about expectations on developers of authoritative *DNS* servers dealing with names that are not in the DNS. In retrospect, this was probably a mistake. (In retrospect, that mistake was probably caused by exhaustion from the discussion.)
> 
> Despite the nausea-inducing of Peter's suggestion, I think folks here need to deal with it, if for no other reason than RFC 6761 still being a standard.

6761 surely doesn't require any particular answers to those questions, thoug; it just requires the respective issues to be considered. Perhaps an alternative approach in this case is to update the answer to (5) to be "no" and update the answer to (6) accordingly?


Joe