Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementations

Mukund Sivaraman <muks@isc.org> Wed, 28 March 2018 15:19 UTC

Return-Path: <muks@isc.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 0121E127369 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 08:19:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.235
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] 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 i00OCzL_YdAa for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 08:19:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.banu.com (mail.banu.com [46.4.129.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E4AA127286 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 08:19:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jurassic (unknown [49.203.219.212]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.banu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D29C232C0A4F; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 15:19:43 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 20:49:39 +0530
From: Mukund Sivaraman <muks@isc.org>
To: tjw ietf <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20180328151939.GA19504@jurassic>
References: <20180324110756.GE69302@vurt.meerval.net> <9a03dbfb-a4c7-9ca2-22c4-d00a0d0d0223@nlnetlabs.nl> <CADyWQ+G7oR5M9pHgj5Ty+4yL1nsep2mpujLiE7nf__kVmN13fQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CADyWQ+G7oR5M9pHgj5Ty+4yL1nsep2mpujLiE7nf__kVmN13fQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/jkLu0oNLmpCG7eBXNDIsMFnEdrs>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] raising the bar: requiring implementations
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: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 15:19:48 -0000

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 10:55:13AM -0400, tjw ietf wrote:
> I would say that most things we have adopted in the past few years do have
> some implementations to reference.
> Not when drafts are adopted, but generally before we head to WGLC I've
> always wanted to see someone
> who implemented the option in some manner.
> 
> But yes, agree.

I'd raise the bar even higher, to see complete implementation in a major
open source DNS implementation when it applies. Sometimes implementation
problems are very revealing (client-subnet should have gone through
this).

		Mukund