Re: [DNSOP] comments on draft-jabley-dnsop-refuse-any-01
Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Mon, 02 November 2015 17:12 UTC
Return-Path: <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91E901A004E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:12:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 dmNEu5nwcMpK for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:12:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ppsw-40.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-40.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.140]) (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 1D1271A0047 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:12:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/
Received: from hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.54]:45693) by ppsw-40.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.156]:25) with esmtpa (EXTERNAL:fanf2) id 1ZtIf3-00043q-lp (Exim 4.86_36-e07b163) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Mon, 02 Nov 2015 17:12:49 +0000
Received: from fanf2 by hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk (hermes.cam.ac.uk) with local id 1ZtIf3-0003VO-Pp (Exim 4.72) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Mon, 02 Nov 2015 17:12:49 +0000
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 17:12:49 +0000
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
X-X-Sender: fanf2@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk
To: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
In-Reply-To: <E9331C17-2B75-4AED-A0F0-1DE51C83DCEB@hopcount.ca>
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1511021710310.25050@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <CAJE_bqdcmL7zF+iW2c=y4hgzXgzAHoYFNAuTtYQYSqJmavYMkg@mail.gmail.com> <E9331C17-2B75-4AED-A0F0-1DE51C83DCEB@hopcount.ca>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LSU 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: Tony Finch <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/jI7dnPcALMPMSw9b-jJIIJEwbOE>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] comments on draft-jabley-dnsop-refuse-any-01
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 02 Nov 2015 17:12:52 -0000
Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> wrote: > > This suggestion was raised (well, there was angry shouting about how > wrong HINFO was) by Ed Lewis, and I talked to him briefly about it in > person in Dublin. Paraphrasing, Ed's strong opinion is that we are > sending a new kind of information using an RRType that was not defined > for this purpose, and that doing so is lazy and inconsistent with the > advice that we gave (e.g.) around SPF vs. TXT. > > A counter-argument to that is that this is new behaviour, and that there > is operational value in being able to send a test query with QTYPE=ANY > and get a response that is human-readable using existing tools. On the gripping hand, if you get a TYPE69 answer (say), a web search would soon explain it is a special abbreviated ANY response. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <dot@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ Southeast Iceland: Westerly or southwesterly 5 to 7. Rough or very rough. Showers. Moderate or good.