IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Delegation acceptance checks [was: Re: [Ext] WGLC rfc8499bis one week extension for lame delegation definition]

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 12 May 2023 01:35 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
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 0DE09C17B320 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 May 2023 18:35:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.847
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.847 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b="P5oRmV9T"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b="Cw0j84rh"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z35B9Kp_nCAz for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 May 2023 18:35:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44A1FC1782D7 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 May 2023 18:35:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 29369 invoked from network); 12 May 2023 01:35:10 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=72b6.645d97ce.k2305; bh=qhMlFnxndxlXimVdbh9pEWIbo34JD+CixtazhT2kM4U=; b=P5oRmV9TVU/A5WwntLsB44Wi2pbKN7EMyCk9UwSIDKf52og1kCVdK/S84ZaMBwr6N+vMRk5MDh9hTBMwko30490OV57SaW5Sx4mnml53UI/4UghyulP1RGzbu2+z4J5q5t9Ik8ohlxA6ZiaT/37gZ7GJTEO8XvA4uT2cQkcu170CUVSWxVsMYBge7B734I6x4A2HH0J4b1/yefOngARR+AejHdLZSCHIP2WsALv7A48Tlfny2km98LiZL5fB8s5rlNIyx/0KYDEM++V5nCGpX5eQE9mw4wP5QhIGUbsAhAAh6d2HG/s2DyK4fzQ92nBA4hd+n8o8DimD6WxA4W0MfA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=72b6.645d97ce.k2305; bh=qhMlFnxndxlXimVdbh9pEWIbo34JD+CixtazhT2kM4U=; b=Cw0j84rh8PDQHmZ/Bo+HyL7cYfK2h6x8qWWnrGO6qAkkfFXo5Ps7lTwmgbhFZBuairRvIS8BwZEUz5MlqC/+7sC2pWDr+uiegP19GqF6RQQcnuMw7rpwisC47zqiE2C4xJi5acqXw3mKd9wnjDKqCam9WgIWZmIUshMAZptDueb99uadVIh7mf+wgNyNJ7VhyXhorJyOrpGMcTuly7D1D/7b8QOYZBh92LsCX9IOpkqNdBTCOnBlL/P2H07040/PLaF17CTsumJUIJm8Of9xVLC8kNF2a8ZQAOI2vXCi+bxxjevH6Zj7CWz6IxqCjaSq+9Laf5i3JFOGwjE8aYx1Jw==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 12 May 2023 01:35:10 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 2ACD2D670AF9; Thu, 11 May 2023 21:35:10 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 21:35:10 -0400
Message-Id: <20230512013510.2ACD2D670AF9@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <728744CF-9FD2-4B0A-8BC2-9CD00F3A619C@isc.org>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Cleverness: minimal
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/s6g9vlNpE52w6-C22UZjyHyc_dE>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Delegation acceptance checks [was: Re: [Ext] WGLC rfc8499bis one week extension for lame delegation definition]
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Fri, 12 May 2023 01:35:17 -0000

It appears that Mark Andrews  <marka@isc.org> said:
>> Oh, I completely agree.  My point was just that even in the root which is small and you
>> would hope would change slowly, it's still a challenge to track what's lame.
>
>It’s not a challenge to track what is lame.  It’s dead simple.  You just have to look.  Getting
>it addressed is the challenge.

Yeah, that's a better way to put it. But the main point still stands,
that it would be a signficant operational change to insist that all
delegated NS be active when delegated, and even moreso to insist that
they continue to be active.

Back in the 1990s when you registered names by email, NetSol checked
that your NS were active before accepting them, but that was back when
it was normal for the back and forth for registering a name to take a
week.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email