Re: [DNSOP] missing use case and problem statement for draft-woodworth-bulk-rr

Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> Mon, 24 July 2017 08:30 UTC

Return-Path: <jim@rfc1035.com>
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 AE1D5131C3B for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 01:30:05 -0700 (PDT)
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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 w17BpfvITvpJ for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 01:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shaun.rfc1035.com (smtp.v6.rfc1035.com [IPv6:2001:4b10:100:7::25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B77AC131C32 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 01:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gromit.rfc1035.com (gromit.rfc1035.com [195.54.233.69]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shaun.rfc1035.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 565712421527; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 08:30:01 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
In-Reply-To: <A05B583C828C614EBAD1DA920D92866BD08247B0@PODCWMBXEX501.ctl.intranet>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 09:29:59 +0100
Cc: dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6924C811-8541-4A06-8717-89FAB4BF5598@rfc1035.com>
References: <alpine.LRH.2.20.1707190347390.10419@ns0.nohats.ca> <20170719215749.2241.qmail@ary.lan> <20170720152559.GD22702@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <F388F80D-AFEA-4AA6-BB14-246C78B22E75@rfc1035.com> <A05B583C828C614EBAD1DA920D92866BD08247B0@PODCWMBXEX501.ctl.intranet>
To: "Woodworth, John R" <John.Woodworth@CenturyLink.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/k5ctKUFSxdyTTIJiKEghT6AhTK0>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] missing use case and problem statement for draft-woodworth-bulk-rr
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, 24 Jul 2017 08:30:06 -0000

> On 22 Jul 2017, at 23:58, Woodworth, John R <John.Woodworth@CenturyLink.com> wrote:
> 
> How exactly does a hide-the-body scheme solve the issue?

I don’t understand the question and have no information/contaxt that would allow me to give a meaningful answer.

What do you mean by “hide-the-body”? And what is “the issue”?

AFAICT you have still to define a use case or problem statement. Until this gets done, nobody can be really sure what problem is supposedly fixed by BULK.