Re: [DNSOP] Status of draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis

Matthijs Mekking <matthijs@pletterpet.nl> Tue, 20 March 2018 10:46 UTC

Return-Path: <matthijs@pletterpet.nl>
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 F161712DB70 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 03:46:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.92
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 OV23fCV-M4-g for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 03:45:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from userp2120.oracle.com (userp2120.oracle.com [156.151.31.85]) (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 A3FAC12E873 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 03:45:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (userp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w2KAhTwr112505 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:45:59 GMT
Received: from userv0021.oracle.com (userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71]) by userp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2gu0t281jy-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:45:58 +0000
Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by userv0021.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id w2KAjwqa004481 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:45:58 GMT
Received: from abhmp0001.oracle.com (abhmp0001.oracle.com [141.146.116.7]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w2KAjvx7011549 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:45:58 GMT
Received: from [31.133.136.99] (/31.133.136.99) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 03:45:57 -0700
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <7C873271-A784-4594-91A3-48C697EEC613@vpnc.org> <22fe4a5c-fcd5-50fd-71da-d714d8f31fe5@pletterpet.nl> <CAAiTEH_khA7H=HsRZnWYhfnmk89WupizcrDSkLFSWipSBD0swQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Matthijs Mekking <matthijs@pletterpet.nl>
Message-ID: <fa654edc-dbab-080c-e188-135963efc1ea@pletterpet.nl>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 11:45:54 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAiTEH_khA7H=HsRZnWYhfnmk89WupizcrDSkLFSWipSBD0swQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=8837 signatures=668693
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=12 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=737 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1803200125
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/j88jG2hCvpH--gBLnv1an-yv_MY>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Status of draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:46:06 -0000


On 19-03-18 20:08, Matthew Pounsett wrote:
> 
> 
> On 19 March 2018 at 08:21, Matthijs Mekking <matthijs@pletterpet.nl 
> <mailto:matthijs@pletterpet.nl>> wrote:
> 
>     I and some others have been using the term 'Negative response' to
>     indicate that the response does not contain any records in the
>     Answer section. Current definition seems to imply that this is only
>     the case if the RCODE is NXDOMAIN, NOERROR, SERVFAIL or if there was
>     a timeout (unreachable). The definition I have been using includes
>     responses with other RCODEs too, for example FORMERR or REFUSED. 
> 
> 
>     I wonder if this is just me and my bubble or if others also a
>     slightly different meaning of 'Negative response' as it is defined
>     now. If there are others, is it worth spending a line or two about
>     this here?
> 
> 
> I would suggest that only NXDOMAIN and NOERROR+ANCOUNT=0 are negative 
> responses.   SERVFAIL, FORMERR, and REFUSED are error responses; you do 
> not know as a result of those responses whether the name/type tuple 
> queried about exists.

Fair enough, just note that RFC 2308 defines SERVFAIL as (Other) 
Negative Response.

Best regards,
   Matthijs


> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>