Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-15.txt

Erik Kline <> Mon, 05 November 2018 02:28 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A83E130E90 for <>; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 18:28:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.252
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.252 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y8fLJfmyxY-0 for <>; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 18:28:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEC8D130E14 for <>; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 18:28:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id k206-v6so10684230ite.0 for <>; Sun, 04 Nov 2018 18:28:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=6ogxhpbejjgVUdmVk1vKvQ+iiq+zrKaA5X7QVvBJIp0=; b=q++CPLXr5jo+bdXPkqyGxbyq4hKmE0ZCdTOzSprxfZ6A8E88V3JKLA7Kl1uytTWbQx 6P9ljGk0FZYkGJRYNqIVjUWBZn5TFxJix7eSR9A8d9bqSnABxgk8WS66VfntBGyC9LNm Ke0L7nb5WqqsaASTt4jpd8C6z2MPugMqoxbeI=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6ogxhpbejjgVUdmVk1vKvQ+iiq+zrKaA5X7QVvBJIp0=; b=G3c9wsDW/4T8+K4vTZJXfOkR3bF9qsbNvndP3q8BLAgbcGPRnFaF6Qv9gYOw+19g2l iqEnUZBLzUNacadYmVaFvrxWXO16zmyW7aL1idMKddPjJDO+Y5njR9T0w3Lmd7zL/RdB 5BYWtvjJZ6XmZOA9oceXpw7ZxtwKabxpHEyFL9ftflDFkhgRRpjtZnlqOfhAIeo2BW1V /d4QBIhBum6xk7fmRyEFyAaawz7Vgk7D9Su2efDM+8n3PT74Tn8YzoIb9YjjGftaETCy dEyOhOlPtwkS7T2r3YL82pfKXs05BP8WUdogP5dGgHvMJC2xKcoS4lPqmS7aq127P5ck OKQg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gLNJFP1A0IqBefbQjkVLJ1QH2qWbAXZHAPjnYCayYr1c4Y+k7HC Mfrf5tb9RNDz7xHyQUOLn25h2RWwP48w1EnB0/uZ3A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5ffatJUosNA09ePu6XiZTv04keHWdWQT0wf0UkfKvKc0r4+zPFSXkoxJqzRFhMNBsUZZb2NSUrLHb9uOj/08K0=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:4486:: with SMTP id o128-v6mr5078828ita.23.1541384911773; Sun, 04 Nov 2018 18:28:31 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Erik Kline <>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2018 09:28:20 +0700
Message-ID: <>
To: Dave Crocker <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-15.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2018 02:28:39 -0000

Dave (others),

One thing I missed earlier (and please forgive me if this was already
discussed), was whether or not _example* should be reserved in the
table in draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-15#section-4.3.

Basically, is there any value in reserving _example* for future RFCs
to use (ones that don't care about the specific _foo label but apply
to all such labels in some way).

Sorry for the last-minute distraction,
On Sun, 4 Nov 2018 at 03:23, <> wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations WG of the IETF.
>         Title           : DNS Scoped Data Through "Underscore" Naming of Attribute Leaves
>         Author          : Dave Crocker
>         Filename        : draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-15.txt
>         Pages           : 14
>         Date            : 2018-11-03
> Abstract:
>    Formally, any DNS resource record may occur under any domain name.
>    However some services use an operational convention for defining
>    specific interpretations of an RRset, by locating the records in a
>    DNS branch, under the parent domain to which the RRset actually
>    applies.  The top of this subordinate branch is defined by a naming
>    convention that uses a reserved node name, which begins with an
>    _underscore.  The underscored naming construct defines a semantic
>    scope for DNS record types that are associated with the parent
>    domain, above the underscored branch.  This specification explores
>    the nature of this DNS usage and defines the "DNS Global Underscore
>    Scoped Entry Registry" with IANA.  The purpose of the Underscore
>    registry is to avoid collisions resulting from the use of the same
>    underscore-based name, for different services.
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> There are also htmlized versions available at:
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list