Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-respsize, was partial glue

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 10 July 2020 02:22 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
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 0F1343A0C0F for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 19:22:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.851
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.851 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, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=VOeJHlyw; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=L+jhCydu
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 AXpaAnzGUNFH for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 19:22:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 4C2733A0C0D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 19:22:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 49724 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2020 02:22:19 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=c238.5f07d0db.k2007; bh=EO+v7+aTSf86jTzbt6U6vY2HOSSOQsQV5C86cV2atu8=; b=VOeJHlywG4al0RX/bLZewXr9rZ6bBsE4Qb/+z67XWS1e+KYlaLffm/pIU21C1tXu4K908GIx/EdmuUKX/R1Pt/zDc2xd+1OO4RxGlfSu2fGsY7wGiDRYxPZBjxiBQdFPPPmJg/0eQODrOdpq6yJHXIiVpi3XpnCJsrRyfDZWPFCVsDGIT5sS1Zu8t4swqqOG9W36Vt4nDve9u3/7Jhr0OqVzPUFS0jRW3xZ1NuDzcjO7QjRO50oiu73370+bwrl7
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=c238.5f07d0db.k2007; bh=EO+v7+aTSf86jTzbt6U6vY2HOSSOQsQV5C86cV2atu8=; b=L+jhCyduLJuaPtQLKbyFYCJSQvsu/vbOJxKpkob/aOCs2bR0paNt3NqnkXtDa+h5bHqRiThYpi3b5/5ZR6iAJVhpgxG8utI4pu1Yn/GOqRQqLNflmT85vaIowj4O42kEd0rFCUCT1CoRSs96SbMJ2FHCTc5o+2IAMvu4JX7oMglyTqZvNe+iv4YJdIz7r+TDXZPosnMxWIJAjgpGjwli29EVHOtunCed66AWrcNCHOT0Mijgs4xDHGrV/E81Rm+H
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTP via TCP6; 10 Jul 2020 02:22:18 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 314C21C78BFC; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 22:22:25 -0400 (EDT)
Date: 9 Jul 2020 22:22:25 -0400
Message-Id: <20200710022225.314C21C78BFC@ary.qy>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Cc: paul@redbarn.org
In-Reply-To: <1738263.TRGBkWWA7Y@linux-9daj>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/fX5TLI3toKiwajq9GluoN1COf5Q>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-respsize, was partial glue
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: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 02:22:22 -0000

In article <1738263.TRGBkWWA7Y@linux-9daj> you write:
>by the way, this is what kato and i, and later jabley, were trying to get at 
>with
>
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-respsize/
>
>but it was like moving mud with a toothpick, so after eleven years (2003 to 
>2014) we gave it up. there are probably some good ideas in there, even now.

Perhaps the mud has dried out enough to make progress now.

I agree it's a reasonable draft that says useful stuff. With minimal
polishing we should be able to publish it.