IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] The DNSOP WG has placed draft-salgado-dnsop-rrserial in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

"libor.peltan" <libor.peltan@nic.cz> Sat, 29 May 2021 07:19 UTC

Return-Path: <libor.peltan@nic.cz>
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 1D10E3A0C3E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 May 2021 00:19:50 -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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 PuVYOfUZvGXM for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 May 2021 00:19:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) (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 372253A0C3D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 May 2021 00:19:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.152] (mem-185.47.220.208.jmnet.cz [185.47.220.208]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8E5E8140A4E for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 May 2021 09:19:43 +0200 (CEST)
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <162221199604.5432.8913611760873877465@ietfa.amsl.com> <c8beea2f-90b6-f005-f137-df47b8dead4d@desec.io>
From: "libor.peltan" <libor.peltan@nic.cz>
Message-ID: <bd9343b2-a1b9-8d2e-25dc-79db599420e5@nic.cz>
Date: Sat, 29 May 2021 09:19:43 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c8beea2f-90b6-f005-f137-df47b8dead4d@desec.io>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.2 at mail
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/kGTyENBGDnNwR1YOALurQFMNB8g>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] The DNSOP WG has placed draft-salgado-dnsop-rrserial in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"
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: Sat, 29 May 2021 07:19:50 -0000

Hi,

just an idea: I don't know how important the amplification factor is. If 
it is, the proposed EDNS option would have the advantage of practically 
no answer:query amplification, unlike multi-query or additional SOA.

Libor

Dne 28. 05. 21 v 21:27 Peter Thomassen napsal(a):
> Hi,
>
> I like the idea of having a way to add provenance information to 
> responses. However, as with all new proposals, I think what's needed 
> is a careful analysis of alternative ways to achieve the same goal, 
> then an assessment of what's the best approach (which may very well 
> turn out to be RRSERIAL).
>
>
> Some thoughts on this (some may be new, others not):
>
>

v2.43.4 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status