Re: [DNSOP] WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-let-localhost-be-localhost-02

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Mon, 29 January 2018 17:42 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
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 4891212F4D3 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 09:42:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.889
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.889 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 xxSu4JCMfiG9 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 09:42:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [24.104.150.213]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A1C512F4DB for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 09:42:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:559:8000:c9:5b6:26c6:b108:e98a] (unknown [IPv6:2001:559:8000:c9:5b6:26c6:b108:e98a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E12E17594C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 17:42:10 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <5A6F5CF1.4080706@redbarn.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 09:42:09 -0800
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 5.0.22 (Windows/20171208)
MIME-Version: 1.0
CC: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <9DCE2F63-EE37-4865-B9D6-6B79BBE05593@gmail.com> <20180129155112.GC16545@mx4.yitter.info>
In-Reply-To: <20180129155112.GC16545@mx4.yitter.info>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/jGorBAMorDbDM-fV-YLs7XbpTvc>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-let-localhost-be-localhost-02
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: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 17:42:15 -0000

chiming in for the hum:

Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
>
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 11:18:08AM -0500, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> This is the opening of the Working Group Last Call for "Let 'localhost' be localhost” (https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-dnsop-let-localhost-be-localhost-02.txt).
>>
>
> I have read this document.
>
> ...
>
> I am really very troubled by the idea that any DNS server should
> return RCODE 3 to a query for "localhost".  (This is items 4 and 5 in
> section 3.)  This is not even wrong: the name _does_ exist, and indeed
> any server on the Internet would know that (since it would itself
> serve the answer _to_ itself of what localhost means; whether it
> should serve it to anyone else might be a different question, but it
> certainly should not respond with RCODE 3).
>
> ...
>
> I am sorry that cannot support advancing the draft in its current
> state.

likewise. i'd prefer this to be crafted as operating system api 
guidance, along the lines of RFC 1535. i can't agree to on-the-wire 
changes along the lines described here.

-- 
P Vixie