Re: [DNSOP] abandoning ANAME and standardizing CNAME at apex

Paul Vixie <> Mon, 25 June 2018 15:47 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B02B5130DCE for <>; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:47:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b8MC0qMcgT9b for <>; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:47:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:559:8000:cd::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53FFF130E05 for <>; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:47:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:559:8000:c9:884e:32fa:afac:1c20] (unknown [IPv6:2001:559:8000:c9:884e:32fa:afac:1c20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 357BE892A2; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:47:28 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:47:27 -0700
From: Paul Vixie <>
User-Agent: Postbox 5.0.25 (Windows/20180328)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tony Finch <>
CC: Paul Wouters <>,, Ray Bellis <>
References: <> <20180619190213.B76962846E19@ary.qy> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] abandoning ANAME and standardizing CNAME at apex
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:47:30 -0000

Tony Finch wrote:
> ANAME will add two things beyond a provisioning-only setup:
> * a standard way to signal to dynamic auth servers where to get A/AAAA
>    records from
> * a way to signal to recursives that they might get a better answer if
>    they query the target themselves
> Even for a provisioning-only setup, ANAME will give the zone admin a
> standard way to configure the provisioning process. That's what I mostly
> want it for.

what do you expect non-dynamic servers to do in the presence of ANAME? i 
assume you'll recommend that they also host real A and AAAA RRsets at 
the same name-node, which only a dynamic authoritative would ignore?

if so, there's a third work flow available, which is to use RFC 2136 
dynamic update to periodically update those "last resort" or "static" A 
and AAAA RRsets, for a non-dynamic server.

and if so, why aren't we just specifying that, and avoiding the creation 
of a new kind of authority server ("dynamic")?

P Vixie