IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-ttl-04: (with COMMENT)

Job Snijders <job@fastly.com> Wed, 19 May 2021 11:10 UTC

Return-Path: <job@fastly.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 966283A0400 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 May 2021 04:10:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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=fastly.com
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 xv3yI8JpAT6a for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 May 2021 04:10:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x52a.google.com (mail-ed1-x52a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52a]) (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 2DE8D3A03F6 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2021 04:10:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x52a.google.com with SMTP id h16so14868288edr.6 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2021 04:10:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastly.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=1rLX6RnzHaIcg8HmrB0rnydddFLNo2AG59irWbb5+6w=; b=bFMsRFoyfQuz/qIcCLgGCgk7cy2sGjZUxG2ojmvllKnwVOAY1jEgUA3yWG5parMMTq nnbY0dqRS+lh7p02mxeMYm2c6a3TCPXIgqj/EQCc6GhzJJ7xgcNFdzWP+e2mlkhpEwQp uTMQo/QgRlgkAaZQKr/ZpN/WrZzYPMTyYXRcY=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=1rLX6RnzHaIcg8HmrB0rnydddFLNo2AG59irWbb5+6w=; b=ASCcwWfifXoScFHxhqZEbgbq3KpJANtvHfxlkGsyaTUA72SilQfawx2mogZ+HUMR2e KYqWTCa4Uj15a98qSJmWgaJyjg5QoHWJ5MYTSSqGmeOVs4xSqCGRNQY1OzCs1Ee0srzS d0ni09ObwNE6D5m4U+7OBHU1/XrpfSm1jIhD/4YxAPNUSR4pdOZw6uyYu0jnyT4Cujnt dwq+v4QVceoE3o84zGUobuTyOYphqwKVpnWn+MyyJl7PDs29x6jOQRSE73BL5ZfyyUIJ xigAhNCbk9YzxJvzru4o6C8ApReF64t80d7wyUZseoQyvG8A7hKZ7m5nCkgkptRBrM/4 5UrA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531uq1KBpsWRmYmPeXaikMEX3Caw7wzz/PIBli6XaqXN9kVQGIfn uqAHKStzDB1nD6S8Wj1DfDlN6g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwB+o5T04wZXGdnSUybODqwThN44IqPT5fOCdGQAVkqU/pC4KlDHe8Vj9EiRTX9E+FXaSlgRw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:c7:: with SMTP id i7mr14019411edu.194.1621422629859; Wed, 19 May 2021 04:10:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from snel ([2a10:3781:276:0:21e:c2ff:fefb:f388]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p7sm7535396edw.43.2021.05.19.04.10.29 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 19 May 2021 04:10:29 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 13:10:27 +0200
From: Job Snijders <job@fastly.com>
To: Peter van Dijk <peter.van.dijk@powerdns.com>
Cc: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, tjw.ietf@gmail.com, dnsop@ietf.org, dnsop-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-ttl@ietf.org
Message-ID: <YKTyI++5tDMek+w3@snel>
References: <162139538526.17414.5467676975353511221@ietfa.amsl.com> <1d677ffc5047a96f6e9e903185f3c08a12f3481c.camel@powerdns.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1d677ffc5047a96f6e9e903185f3c08a12f3481c.camel@powerdns.com>
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/fagfVwM33kbh7WNVxoxN13IML3M>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-ttl-04: (with COMMENT)
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: Wed, 19 May 2021 11:10:37 -0000

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:28:16PM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> > Section 3.1, etc.
> > 
> > |  The TTL of the NSEC RR that is returned MUST be the lesser of the
> > |  MINIMUM field of the SOA record and the TTL of the SOA itself.
> > |  This matches the definition of the TTL for negative responses in
> > |  [RFC2308].  A signer MAY cause the TTL of the NSEC RR to have a
> > |  deviating value after the SOA record has been updated, to allow
> > |  for an incremental update of the NSEC chain.
> > 
> > I don't think I understand what a "deviating value" would be (and in
> > which direction it would deviate).
> 
> This sentence was added because some implementations may need time to
> rework the whole NSEC/NSEC3 chain after a TTL change. The deviation
> would be 'part of the chain still has the old, wrong, value - for a
> while'. I'll ponder better words - suggestions are very welcome, of
> course.

Perhaps:

	Because some signers incrementally update the NSEC chain, a transient
	inconsistency between the observed and expected TTL MAY exist.

Kind regards,

Job

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email