Re: [DNSOP] DNS versioning, was The DNSOP WG has placed draft-woodworth-bulk-rr in state "Candidate for WG Adoption"

Matthew Pounsett <> Fri, 21 July 2017 19:19 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42090131A50 for <>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 12:19:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 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_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nJS4oFc7bL3s for <>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 12:19:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F8C2131A55 for <>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 12:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id k43so15873632uaf.3 for <>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 12:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jRgRHnpuB6Ce1W7+hra5bw65ulBPJ80rHyFYyH6/2ZE=; b=wv3JQkBHjEuZfMMuX6XkJLLq36S7xHfsSgKn9t/KSXsuCiGpt6FCsy6pAJnZYz3D6t NwCkJn0AgQ8qoYQOXBmgF5GidDwleiGWcQOqo/f3HEIynjR2fiXQ2qX8mh5cT5mX46VJ 80PnulOmIpgBcy2JrzdzM5ag3yJg+5/H3q7M2idVzSfVlPp0Z/8ePigYkvZP3/aLt3km Kuxg5FawS0HusKU/o2vaQUay1Xdau1MmQ1ko8TlVDsTNOCxIrw/IfzXW0iUeMXEiz5Xl eWK3JBlN22IZprsXeOQ3IIEqiOen9JWHAsa9oYCHGrIs5rLLrRIbXNtDYZgWtkTxfZ41 Egwg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jRgRHnpuB6Ce1W7+hra5bw65ulBPJ80rHyFYyH6/2ZE=; b=rJRYSD9b22OFZAzINlZrAL83I1dkHmGXNt0ZCGmrD2ugPPg2P5UF8RAPiwLMuJBUbB V5XUBjwIUkm/DGi2+a3Yljw+UE+sF4Id8qoZtv/CRlMnEbPALM1pab03d1UkwDQwb0U0 yiSKTYR89OYyx6WOGPgYVQFXGt1pRdEr2jewBBvL51PPW2+KU7l8f8UZOy2QQgy99d+R g37pAp2SSbtsmlxa39yrlCr72XlLuI9kzLnqoApHhhYyZsCm1G7ppMMFiRcyv3cpibCD m0FlXeIbMxh+PVVhoHJM+CQmBrsEKtSKZrE9vxqngKsRWthLmon6tWm+Ij6GPA1dN0ZJ KARg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw111Rlcwb22fKUqlsQcb4Ve8Gu2jRiN5HozgAjFi5hBvtiXE9pTju DJ4029S3IjpiXynUSP/pwV0Ro/3/ga8e
X-Received: by with SMTP id e31mr5250394uaa.73.1500664755284; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 12:19:15 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 12:19:14 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <20170719215749.2241.qmail@ary.lan> <> <>
From: Matthew Pounsett <>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 21:19:14 +0200
Message-ID: <>
To: John R Levine <>
Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer <>, dnsop <>, Paul Wouters <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1912c6aad5820554d8bd8f"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNS versioning, was The DNSOP WG has placed draft-woodworth-bulk-rr in state "Candidate for WG Adoption"
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 19:19:20 -0000

On 20 July 2017 at 17:53, John R Levine <> wrote:

> That's why I don't share the fears about BULK: you cannot easily
>> deploy a new feature that will require a change in the resolvers,
>> because you don't know all the resolvers, and cannot change them even
>> if you know they are too old. But your secondaries are only a small
>> set of carefully chosen servers, and you have your say.
> I hear otherwise from people who run big DNS farms.  It's common to use
> multiple secondary providers, and it's hard to tell who's running what
> server software.  I also note that it took about a decade before people
> felt comfortable using DNAMEs.


I'm a customer who is considering deploying the BULK RR type into my zone,
and I would like to know whether your systems support it.

Thank you,

That said.. there is still an issue with key distribution for online
signing which is required to make this work.   I see the utility in BULK,
but I'm persuaded that there needs to be more work before it's deployable
in an environment where *XFR is required.