Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-05.txt

Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Tue, 04 April 2017 18:35 UTC

Return-Path: <marka@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 3CA03129469 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 11:35:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 Zz9u_5hj0U6v for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 11:35:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.pao1.isc.org (mx.pao1.isc.org [149.20.64.53]) (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 198F6129497 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 11:35:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org (zmx1.isc.org [149.20.0.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.pao1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 056203493D3; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 18:35:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6A81160045; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 18:35:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95761160071; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 18:35:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zmx1.isc.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 06cigvahO9Hs; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 18:35:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from rock.dv.isc.org (c27-253-115-14.carlnfd2.nsw.optusnet.com.au [27.253.115.14]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D66FD160045; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 18:35:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from rock.dv.isc.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rock.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B15A6A8A07B; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 04:35:25 +1000 (AEST)
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
References: <148942077219.17007.342057944218385620@ietfa.amsl.com> <20170328143352.GA12923@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:33:52 -0500." <20170328143352.GA12923@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2017 04:35:25 +1000
Message-Id: <20170404183525.2B15A6A8A07B@rock.dv.isc.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/nmZXRkXsYM1qEX5BDBnwhTT3sko>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-05.txt
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, 04 Apr 2017 18:35:38 -0000

In message <20170328143352.GA12923@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>rg>, Stephane Bortzmeyer writes:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 08:59:32AM -0700,
>  internet-drafts@ietf.org <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote 
>  a message of 45 lines which said:
> 
> >         Title           : DNS Terminology
> >         Authors         : Paul Hoffman
> >                           Andrew Sullivan
> >                           Kazunori Fujiwara
> > 	Filename        : draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-05.txt
> 
> The new definition of QNAME describes as equivalent two conflicting
> definitions, the original one, in RFC 1034, and the one of RFC 2308,
> which seems used only by this RFC. IMHO, we should keep only the RFC
> 1034 definition.

RFC 1034

            If the data at the node is a CNAME, and QTYPE doesn't
            match CNAME, copy the CNAME RR into the answer section
            of the response, change QNAME to the canonical name in
            the CNAME RR, and go back to step 1.

Note "QNAME" refers the the name *after* CNAME substituion when you
are following the process as described in 4.3.2. Algorithm.

There is no confict between 1034 and 2308.  Only a failure to
examine all uses of QNAME in 1034.

Mark

> I filed an errata against RFC 2308
> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=4983>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka@isc.org