Re: [DNSOP] Delegation into the interior of a zone?

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 28 December 2018 22:27 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 E74141311BA for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Dec 2018 14:27:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, 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=kG3I/uRg; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=YE2OlP2b
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 VujVvutbJbmj for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Dec 2018 14:27:35 -0800 (PST)
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 248361311A5 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Dec 2018 14:27:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 45943 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2018 22:27:32 -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=b373.5c26a354.k1812; bh=7mN6gN3j+7L9AWWO4D03M60foejOurEx59Htof9jGjU=; b=kG3I/uRguzzcfTDIqqZrWZXqj9w8kJgBKq2+6UUYPw7SNwgEs30e14QVOutNkYGSTD48qBSh0AxK7i2rxDq/Spc7XISqFQ3nQeWUY4a2491IQB08a/BIBs8ppxjqgun35RqL2seN62ROnE2rFe4MTykKoPJW4VJJdn8JAyUoPEoI+fD1COGLS4U2OJJuNgOEuBwNY/MgdsOjq+Sb9bq6H3IWZ2jBa+fChWUTC7bYeHfjrVo4oHjtzRbYyrhPHmv/
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=b373.5c26a354.k1812; bh=7mN6gN3j+7L9AWWO4D03M60foejOurEx59Htof9jGjU=; b=YE2OlP2bB/iLla+XwU3BVdt6yDU4GRaAjWLdLNfr8pDOtEQ41wCug0g1K+B1l1JAKB8ROo8goEmM6t0cxDWiznKd1K3tzncprhSOeQegJYMpSjWbn0uw8hmP/rbKfzHXAaDd7xcEKNFG/eNEIFpRrmRTAvQSTNLQmVc/O2BmEKMhzrS4tJRMoG0IKl4eVMDLsuCKaVc3XqGVrgg0e2ILRyUe+zomLiGVkvt4/51R7nOreUeslI+22o+ie5Ed2uCV
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; 28 Dec 2018 22:27:32 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 6BEC3200C09338; Fri, 28 Dec 2018 17:27:31 -0500 (EST)
Date: 28 Dec 2018 17:27:31 -0500
Message-Id: <20181228222732.6BEC3200C09338@ary.qy>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Cc: gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net
In-Reply-To: <2f50b5bd-ea7d-8009-f207-cce3cddf3bf5@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net>
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/hm-eQ_1qkZgaUYSg_24Uln9ASvw>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Delegation into the interior of a zone?
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, 28 Dec 2018 22:27:37 -0000

In article <2f50b5bd-ea7d-8009-f207-cce3cddf3bf5@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net>; you write:
>Both work perfectly fine.  named-compilezone produces the expected lines.
>
>1.localhost.  604800  IN  CNAME  1.bob.example.net.
>2.localhost.  604800  IN  CNAME  2.bob.example.net.
>3.localhost.  604800  IN  CNAME  3.bob.example.net.
>4.localhost.  604800  IN  CNAME  4.bob.example.net.
>5.localhost.  604800  IN  NS     ns1.example.com.
>6.localhost.  604800  IN  NS     ns1.example.com.
>7.localhost.  604800  IN  NS     ns1.example.com.
>8.localhost.  604800  IN  NS     ns1.example.com.
>
>Which of the two methods above is easier (or poses fewer questions) to 
>understand by someone who's not familiar with BIND, much less $GENERATE?

I'd think it depends whether invalid delegations bother them, like if,
say, ns1.example.com might not be running BIND.

R's,
John