IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Current DNS standards, drafts & charter

Matthew Pounsett <matt@conundrum.com> Tue, 27 March 2018 23:22 UTC

Return-Path: <matt@conundrum.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 1942E124B18 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:22:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=conundrum-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 42QMcbAbB6eE for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:22:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x232.google.com (mail-io0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08AE01200C1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:22:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x232.google.com with SMTP id r18so1292054ioa.1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:22:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=conundrum-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=3L/AeUV8Nx8KDAg+KVYTaGnKPevV+5GmxhvHfV2a7Dc=; b=dgt8lEz8/1dUKoHTKSRKRDYx8vaZnVApm8DFrgZX0zk9eBodAhKLLGmMZONBxZK9x1 1oeUl1Rn9yCXgLDaQqPfSBAZUSyonJWry4EXzQ62+RApsEHStB3bLH0nFSiOcTt0Qcut Wv/b8GGS0qJXz0OM67vw77h1+iLiRhqayI37HO+66Lo1aYkSkdT3ktOTkwykkOtr+8dd iltxxwvjC8XGNUrEPDzXKouhud2n/8hOkK3MqEWAGfWy9iWLLkwiIJsXl75LIt54+2v0 geDmODOiXtzwRotspCrC4TZz9ziW6FzT311Cz9bpC0Uat+G1sE1D0OpnUTlzR5OVrYmg rJSA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=3L/AeUV8Nx8KDAg+KVYTaGnKPevV+5GmxhvHfV2a7Dc=; b=fPwDU+knmcyjs0QSbS74Er8LlIxPgsd/ILP4S7NCx/TugZVytJLd+BP3FAMkTqdNUy 2sv7WhJ+q5Ff+d4nUfEmtDQtdTy9bhviEv/Hn58X6FCp3rwJfa4VgTaWG6Qz9SOEsfOl 4xraPqhBHwgb4AlDst3LMteemHTmgExOKgH4zapSEpEM+XmywQ4G7MxpD4MrZ3QpZZ0z 4tff3yBo1ZzHidqc6CE0CeokmXZ6iXG4jmHh0psLArA8GNY0Q8kXgbAXs6sDA/kY5o5S wwJ3WOj0vv+u7e6UJ5bR82KhXYQQmJlfvIIjEAnA15AmXQGWAGUJdoe28QbmGd5vzQ0S EizQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7HYVtjd3qM1fPPIshU+hvoGZvBEuamvvOVgX96r8Av4A7LsU3ek 2fx4rlBspCKq4Z/TR/bMv/dH1lDnZLwHT6JdfkyPmQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELt8kPWQAkobmD+q2a4SlskJUEpzEK4cU299xlG8cN0K625hdK9Cnk8N6yNwCdqd7skEzyTYE05xr6t3f/qaGtE=
X-Received: by 10.107.48.3 with SMTP id w3mr44719887iow.84.1522192975066; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:22:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.2.112.197 with HTTP; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:22:54 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5ABAB891.3010306@redbarn.org>
References: <20180326154645.GB24771@server.ds9a.nl> <CA3D81B6-164F-4607-A7E6-B999B90C4DA8@gmail.com> <5852643C-B414-4C3E-A1B9-553054D3DD46@isc.org> <CAAiTEH8aA3J1j4iUQDisDHiUJXopykKkssuhOK=v+iVV_XZWyA@mail.gmail.com> <5ABAB891.3010306@redbarn.org>
From: Matthew Pounsett <matt@conundrum.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 19:22:54 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAiTEH94S9VE0_QNEmUvVEkvxtBi2hoWo3DUVENJbEiXM+kkHw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
Cc: Ondřej Surý <ondrej@isc.org>, Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide@gmail.com>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114448d28f139c05686d2b60"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/nVn5Slcsem9nSf1bWZjwTl6OmG8>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Current DNS standards, drafts & charter
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, 27 Mar 2018 23:22:58 -0000

On 27 March 2018 at 17:33, Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> wrote:

> i see no purpose in change documents, which would add to the set of things
> a new implementer would have to know to read, and then to read.


I think we're discussing the same idea from different perspectives.

I think writing a new document that references other documents to say
"here's the sections in each of these you need to implement" without
actually making  any of them clearer is unhelpful, and just adds to the
pile of documents that an implementer needs to read.  While I recognize
there's already been one failed attempt at this, I'd still much prefer we
replace as much of that stack as possible with a smaller set of clearer
documents.



> re:
>
> Matthew Pounsett wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 27 March 2018 at 03:49, Ondřej Surý <ondrej@isc.org
>> <mailto:ondrej@isc.org>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     Again, from experience from dnsext, I would strongly suggest that
>>     any work in this area is split into CHANGE documents and REWRITE
>>     documents, with strict scope. Documents rewriting existing RFCs
>>     while adding more stuff at the same time tend to not reach the
>>     finish line.
>>
>> Does this include combining documents?  For example, it would probably
>> make sense to combine some of the clarifications documents into any
>> rewrite of 1034/1035.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> DNSOP mailing list
>> DNSOP@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>>
>
> --
> P Vixie
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email