Re: [DNSOP] [EXT] Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7686 (6761)

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Wed, 01 December 2021 01:10 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
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 553493A07CF for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 17:10:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.951
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.951 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.852, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=redbarn.org
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 pJ_tN68-JJQa for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 17:10:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from util.redbarn.org (util.redbarn.org [24.104.150.212]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB3233A07CC for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 17:10:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [IPv6:2001:559:8000:cd::5]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by util.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAE671B242A; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 01:10:33 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=redbarn.org; s=util; t=1638321033; bh=sPR1RQt9ezT4NlwxAMuTMXlCn2nzuUmF725Mxve99GM=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=FE6Pqz17C4wJHHBfVvRu8/UxbKVh2XcJPjSTXCyDzhWKluRMS+EBcDNj8Hl0u3Fdc IG0CoUyqvRjhQcxguZstZvTTPs0G1wHzDrn91yD/N88Zl3IVxm1h6+pSpw5/M3hBko +FrQSneWPOxhF5X4QwpgnNlOUBoC0CQG0t0m0uNo=
Received: from [IPv6:2001:559:8000:c9:3129:49f8:14c7:f25d] (unknown [IPv6:2001:559:8000:c9:3129:49f8:14c7:f25d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A9FC57597E; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 01:10:33 +0000 (UTC)
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Cc: "libor.peltan" <libor.peltan@nic.cz>, dnsop@ietf.org, Paul Vixie <paul=40redbarn.org@dmarc.ietf.org>
References: <20211129190711.E4E9B36417@rfc-editor.org> <19c96ba9-a582-a24-b73-8e86a08c7b68@nohats.ca> <794d45f4b9093a019b94aee4730161d358b5ba79.camel@powerdns.com> <198228F8-F970-47E3-8690-5B13FB324231@hopcount.ca> <d3957532-33e8-f79f-a94f-8775948c886b@iecc.com> <28d5129a-b543-7d65-6d91-c87b421bbe1c@nic.cz> <d666dd21-10b2-c8d2-16b8-c5c723712613@redbarn.org> <9dacfae6-0dca-8687-466a-6ce20b7d9e88@nic.cz> <CAPt1N1nei=QUcXji9XqD5q75XQnNYkn5ZEWMoJs6k_OahdOSUA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
Message-ID: <b149b55e-1385-9907-0695-f780b469464c@redbarn.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 17:10:33 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/7.0.52
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPt1N1nei=QUcXji9XqD5q75XQnNYkn5ZEWMoJs6k_OahdOSUA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/tJNBMH6aYY607okpTj2hEzmmNaE>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [EXT] Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7686 (6761)
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, 01 Dec 2021 01:10:40 -0000


Ted Lemon wrote on 2021-11-30 17:04:
> I don’t see how any answer from an authoritative server other than 
> REFUSED really makes sense for a domain for which that server is not 
> authoritative. It hasn’t failed. It’s been asked a bogus question. It 
> doesn’t make sense for it to theorize that it might be misconfigured.

i only use REFUSED if the same question from some other query source (by 
IP) or signed differently (with TSIG or SIG(0)) could possibly work. for 
out-of-authority requests, the server must fail to answer.