IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] A conversational description of sentinel.

"Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Tue, 06 February 2018 02:21 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.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 2F525124239 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 18:21:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 odHUhxA6MZuz for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 18:21:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (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 B5051120725 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 18:21:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.32.60.84] (50-1-51-141.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.141]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w162KoYl071856 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 5 Feb 2018 19:20:51 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-51-141.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.141] claimed to be [10.32.60.84]
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
To: Geoff Huston <gih@apnic.net>
Cc: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>, Petr Špaček <petr.spacek@nic.cz>, dnsop@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2018 18:21:07 -0800
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.10r5443)
Message-ID: <D07FE583-06F7-436D-97EF-4747B815AD3F@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <FDFE42D8-B805-4336-A9A5-B81F416B3251@apnic.net>
References: <CAHw9_iKnD4WtTKyof=nm4ChmDZ5mAPqA7a_-m1t_Lauugf4Uow@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1801251505070.5022@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <CAHw9_iJ-gwC1ZoWQ3YiJraD3eoUf-9-Ay--rPYzy1zWYUzvYmg@mail.gmail.com> <FDCED4D6-A7CE-465B-8344-CA89753ADF19@vpnc.org> <74C0CA59-6D53-4A60-ACBA-4AF5B51FE3FF@apnic.net> <D5D013D4-1EAD-434B-863A-29CB1BBEF4E4@vpnc.org> <496EFA88-BA70-460B-BFB2-69B2C7BC905D@apnic.net> <4540A279-4A37-4245-AE61-BEE5342E3F72@vpnc.org> <20180202075530.Horde.UWaxe9eenZ7PyxWYFHCFGdN@andreasschulze.de> <e8ac7bd0-26e6-cf97-e2ef-0ead50dc18ce@nic.cz> <88E7D27C-048E-44CB-B317-C892EA603D31@isc.org> <0c2a4a38-49d7-2b46-1ac8-1dda0812e217@nic.cz> <CAHw9_iJ6yL12OaGW5+fm8M3YUkrj46CvC2-ob7Xrc5HEaA_Z1Q@mail.gmail.com> <f9861a96-a930-bd08-7cf5-5c6b003f706e@nic.cz> <24C74B01-FC08-41CD-BB16-FD122F9EB61A@apnic.net> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1802051246230.30577@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <FDFE42D8-B805-4336-A9A5-B81F416B3251@apnic.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/leJKCxZizZBmODnVDpPdMjEJFMk>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] A conversational description of sentinel.
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: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 02:21:22 -0000

On 5 Feb 2018, at 11:18, Geoff Huston wrote:

>> On 5 Feb 2018, at 11:47 pm, Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> wrote:
>>
>> Geoff Huston <gih@apnic.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> if not  underscores and IF “xm—“ as a leading substring is not 
>>> acceptable for
>>> some reason, then what label format would be acceptable for this
>>> measure?
>>
>> Maybe put the -- in the middle somewhere? e.g. is-ta--NNNN 
>> not-ta—NNNN
>>
>
>
> I thought this was due to some concern over the wording in RFC 
> <mumble>(some IDN
> RFC whose number I can’t recall right now!) over a comment that the 
> UC label
> should not contain the starting sequence "<letter> <letter> - -”
>
> Is there a broader concern over the use of double hypens in labels in 
> hostname
> contexts in the DNS?

Not from me. I think Tony's idea is likely fine, but I also think 
kskroll-sentinel-is-ta-NNNN is perfectly fine as well.

--Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email