[DNSOP] Search lists revisited (Was: WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-let-localhost-be-localhost-02

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Mon, 12 February 2018 11:12 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
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 7C3A31241F3 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 03:12:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 llZUnzKwVeOB for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 03:12:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (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 3766F1201FA for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 03:12:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 575DF28074B; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:12:01 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 50EC228074E; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:12:01 +0100 (CET)
Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (relay01.prive.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:15::11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A4C428074B; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:12:01 +0100 (CET)
Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.tech.ipv6.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:1348:7::86:133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46A7C663EBE0; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:12:01 +0100 (CET)
Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3B6EE401E0; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:12:01 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:12:01 +0100
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Cc: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
Message-ID: <20180212111201.iogcwngobam44joh@nic.fr>
References: <40992CF7-5740-43ED-8B78-8D8A9B50A15C@isc.org> <F28D0F1D-416E-4016-8A5A-95173FFFAA4E@fugue.com> <CANLjSvVd+vj8M+vBOokfpOL1fmq2iU9JAhSCd6eY_aoE1p5SMQ@mail.gmail.com> <97783B49-11C9-47F1-8F73-3D909C9B4DC4@fugue.com> <CANLjSvUV1RPR8nhLXCEL0WT9=2Lqb+4STh+7gSRPvv_Mmf-NTA@mail.gmail.com> <698033B2-09A6-4E66-82AD-04906D4DEA1B@fugue.com> <20180209225508.GC974@mx4.yitter.info> <CAHw9_i+OhMckTx5rniXTJJHXZXHtHt8wYO2XU9_kCmdW+nswfg@mail.gmail.com> <78DB0408-9870-4855-936A-3C4774B2CDE7@hopcount.ca> <CAHw9_i+6BPECPByUDzMx07tX4zMSK5RZ5+HPiS67_vOVjjnzMQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHw9_i+6BPECPByUDzMx07tX4zMSK5RZ5+HPiS67_vOVjjnzMQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3
X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-5-amd64 x86_64
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000150, version=1.2.2
X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2018.2.12.110616
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/o965UZOMAW6O0jk7P_HYyMdyXlc>
Subject: [DNSOP] Search lists revisited (Was: WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-let-localhost-be-localhost-02
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, 12 Feb 2018 11:12:06 -0000

On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 09:38:54PM +0000,
 Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote 
 a message of 97 lines which said:

> that might be a useful thing to do -- documenting the issues caused
> by search lists [...] and that IETF technologies shouldn't rely on
> them

That's certainly a better proposal than the initial one (banning
search lists).

However, I wonder if it is really IETF business? It is a local
decision, after all.