[DNSOP] The actors in draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any-06.txt

"Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Mon, 05 March 2018 22:07 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.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 C776012008A for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 14:07:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 iuiXZXof78EU for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 14:07:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (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 B3592126DC2 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 14:07:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.32.60.149] (50-1-51-141.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.141]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w25M6ZMv009025 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 5 Mar 2018 15:06:40 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-51-141.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.141] claimed to be [10.32.60.149]
From: "Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
To: "Joe Abley" <jabley@hopcount.ca>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 14:07:02 -0800
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.10r5443)
Message-ID: <EBDC2980-E72D-4B75-93D9-8AE509315C76@vpnc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/tVDD7Z30ow8gs9IkE_zeM97cRMI>
Subject: [DNSOP] The actors in draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any-06.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 22:07:14 -0000

In Section 4, it says:

    1.  A DNS responder can choose to select one or a larger subset of
        the available RRSets at the QNAME.

    2.  A DNS responder can return a synthesised HINFO resource record.
        See Section 6 for discussion of the use of HINFO.

    3.  Resolver can try to give out the most likely records the
        requester wants.  This is not always possible and the result
        might well be a large response.

After reading the whole document, I can't figure out why #3 is about 
resolvers only. Was this intentional? If so, it should be explained. If 
not, please revise again to make these three scenarios use the same 
language.

--Paul Hoffman