IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Related Domains By DNS (RDBD) Draft

"A. Schulze" <sca@andreasschulze.de> Wed, 27 February 2019 19:50 UTC

Return-Path: <sca@andreasschulze.de>
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 CF87F1310EA for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 11:50:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 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_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=andreasschulze.de header.b=OZhIqsYC; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=andreasschulze.de header.b=SBJFM8/O
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 8isgf-Oovgq3 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 11:50:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mta.somaf.de (mta.somaf.de [IPv6:2001:470:77b3:103::25]) (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 14BEC131129 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 11:50:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=andreasschulze.de; i=@andreasschulze.de; q=dns/txt; s=ed25519; t=1551297012; h=subject : to : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : from; bh=eZNJESr1n9+gOV/ckNtcbJLQtbBivuboG/776WuBNaU=; b=OZhIqsYCxlpnn2bZZsAKEu7oGPjRn2dEsTtzoYd01YlAAIA1t+XVU6O6 pjJnTpgiLNTqoMNGRMmArFRPt4vEBw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=andreasschulze.de; s=20190120-D99A; t=1551297012; x=1556297012; bh=eZNJESr1n9+gOV/ckNtcbJLQtbBivuboG/776WuBNaU=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Message-ID:Date:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:from:reply-to:subject:date:to:cc:content-type: message-id; b=SBJFM8/Ofd55d6Bs1Memf8gSlo3tcKJ4NdS0ZtSWiNfwq0allo2FJbgDsJkwmEkfO jB5l9kCFpzTRFjyT/xlii60UM9VUJsvBygoHoyBWyuQPvD/S8YPFcRGFwecADgTE5r BflEY3HvkUljWN1sI+QFnlhax1U+G36aD9Q0tTWmqk3fJVPEYaDOrf6wNekh+jUHnD mLX24DWuSF+9MrvHpdWkU1FwhZIblJirMQBxqYVE1AKMEiMpf206B5aV/VY4D4s10F Vt30+QE/9rzGTu1zyfgIDahZda3DnSXL0hupqUptZPZYFx0WQmwRRQ8D+rbVzUw4lz pc5Ay/XpTkkug==
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <5de9ba1c3ae34edb9c7f39e0e9c3b143@PACDCEX19.cable.comcast.com>
From: "A. Schulze" <sca@andreasschulze.de>
Message-ID: <4382d0c5-4cc2-82a1-3fe5-8ffa42cfafdd@andreasschulze.de>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 20:50:10 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5de9ba1c3ae34edb9c7f39e0e9c3b143@PACDCEX19.cable.comcast.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/rCfEFP3xfbx6wqCTHiL-vOXn-WA>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Related Domains By DNS (RDBD) Draft
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 27 Feb 2019 19:50:20 -0000


Am 25.02.19 um 21:38 schrieb Brotman, Alexander:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-brotman-rdbd/

Hello @all,

I read the draft. Interesting idea ...

page 3: s/namess/names/

page 3: "sample TXT record for the parent domain..."
why should the record contain a "s=2018a". Isn't the selector name already defined by the label itself?

6.2. a.com->b.com->c.com->a.com
isn't it better using the example domain? "a.example -> b.example -> c.example -> a.example"

is there a reason that loops only *SHOULD* end after 3 lookups?
SPF for example has a *hard* limit of 10 lookups (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7208#section-4.6.4)

Page 6 / example:
"The published record would be: ..."
I'm missing the label *where* this record would be published.

Just an idea: is this something we could work on during the IETF 104 hackathon?

Andeas

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email