Re: [DNSOP] [art] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-03.txt

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Wed, 21 March 2018 18:17 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 A8B8912E050; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 11:17:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dcrocker.net
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 6jgGYqaJI9xD; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 11:17:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (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 38B8C12762F; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 11:17:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.8.128]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id w2LIIqxN000814 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 21 Mar 2018 11:18:52 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dcrocker.net; s=default; t=1521656332; bh=0KFisZR4HZoTZBZ8+y1BBOkqFwTzZlxIdfEhmKKfHBY=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Reply-To:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=VaKe1/3ZOK/+0sr1tx5LR6cxpO0ilL2/ANDf6BdycUPBu4Vmbhmw8vMl3uJEy/jtt cFFcqv8WZl7kjcDhn5f4NmlWYmklHQK3Ae/0vj9O7h+GnYt7iUWYD79U252JQ2GnCr gZO2MEZlQkXhDn6akmuUSV18Ey86x/LeR6GR68xI=
To: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
Cc: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>, art@ietf.org, dnsop@ietf.org
References: <f7b85bac-b050-5003-2df0-a48b1ef2f929@dcrocker.net> <e1f41670-ada8-eaac-468c-c712b338a10b@dcrocker.net> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1803201804440.8940@dhcp-8344.meeting.ietf.org> <A7711F58-5145-49E8-9158-B2F94D0EABBF@redbarn.org> <7c168dc1-2ea7-d47e-78b7-0380e5d0aa84@dcrocker.net> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1803211104210.9553@ary.local> <5244d327-f8ea-1590-c663-1d92e0b194c4@dcrocker.net> <5AB27439.40801@redbarn.org>
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
Message-ID: <72e481c6-b8f7-4c75-d187-b49b5fa9a735@dcrocker.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 11:17:24 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5AB27439.40801@redbarn.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/pGxzRAS0G90MoZ0zLQPJ8TQO9oA>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [art] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-03.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: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 18:17:35 -0000

On 3/21/2018 8:03 AM, Paul Vixie wrote:
> dave, i wasn't going to reply at all, since your snark is a turn-off. 

Snark?  You think my note was "crotchety, snappish; sarcastic, 
impertinent, or irreverent"?  It wasn't any of those things, though 
perhaps it's interesting you thought it was.  But only perhaps.

Your note made no obvious sense to me, since it began with what is 
really a platitude (that I really do agree with) and ended with a 
generality that had no obvious linkage to the current work.


> however, john decided to make this thing real, so now i'm stuck with it.
> 
> srv has a registry. that's working. that need not change.
> 
> adding another registry for other rr types who want to have well known 
> underscored names will harm nobody and i'm unopposed.

Much of the discussion of the current topic -- previously and now -- has 
tended to stray from the pragmatics, whereas that is the only thinking 
driving my concerns and suggestions.  In particular, some people seem to 
have a mystical -- or equally impractical -- view of how name collisions 
will be avoided between independent registries making assignments out of 
the same name space.

I prefer to take as simple an approach as possible: have a single 
registry control all allocations out of a name space.


So if you will please explain:

   1.  How the SRV underscore registration process and the new 
registration process will avoid collisions

   2.  How people revising existing specs that use _underscore naming 
will know that their document needs to use the new registry

it would be helpful.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net