Re: [DNSOP] request for adoption

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Tue, 13 November 2018 08:26 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 ED1F6130E59 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 00:26:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
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 mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RiHQeT9ppb19 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 00:26:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [IPv6:2001:559:8000:cd::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EA88130DFE for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 00:26:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.202.1.204] (unknown [80.87.27.91]) (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 A713E892C6; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 08:26:45 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <5BEA8AC2.3060504@redbarn.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 08:26:42 +0000
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 5.0.25 (Windows/20180328)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
CC: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>, DNSOP WG <dnsop@ietf.org>, Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
References: <87a7mefuz6.fsf@nic.cz> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1811130101010.9026@bofh.nohats.ca> <5881F57A-4C85-4B06-A079-59B58F432EC3@isc.org> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1811130117430.9026@bofh.nohats.ca>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1811130117430.9026@bofh.nohats.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/jiLB3TNOjfwFzz4Pd4RronITw54>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] request for adoption
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: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 08:26:51 -0000


Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2018, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
>>> DLV 32769 DNSSEC Lookaside Validation
>>
>> DLV isn’t obsolete. The registry ISC published is gone but anyone can
>> publish their own
>> registry.
>
> The question is if that is a bug or feature. I think it is a bug and its
> time for the code base to remove this. It's ripe for abuse.

what arguments or evidence do you have that it's a bug of any kind?

it's been quite useful for internal DNSSEC for non-public zones.

-- 
P Vixie