Re: [DNSOP] draft-yao-dnsop-idntld-implementation-00 and DNAME

"YAO Jiankang" <yaojk@cnnic.cn> Wed, 21 October 2009 05:56 UTC

Return-Path: <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
X-Original-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E7323A6905 for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Oct 2009 22:56:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Quarantine-ID: <ObxCS7iMmRfI>
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Duplicate header field: "Message-ID"
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.282
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.282 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.464, BAYES_05=-1.11, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.803]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ObxCS7iMmRfI for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Oct 2009 22:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cnnic.cn (smtp.cnnic.cn [159.226.7.146]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 439EB3A68D1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Oct 2009 22:56:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (eyou send program); Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:57:04 +0800
Message-ID: <456104624.11717@cnnic.cn>
X-EYOUMAIL-SMTPAUTH: yaojk@cnnic.cn
Received: from unknown (HELO whatisfuture) (127.0.0.1) by 127.0.0.1 with SMTP; Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:57:04 +0800
Message-ID: <012801ca5213$50891da0$236ff1da@whatisfuture>
From: YAO Jiankang <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
To: Alfred H�nes <ah@TR-Sys.de>, draft-yao-dnsop-idntld-implementation@cabernet.tools.IETF.ORG
References: <455701296.17605@cnnic.cn>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:57:03 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3598
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350
Cc: namedroppers@ops.ietf.org, dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-yao-dnsop-idntld-implementation-00 and DNAME
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 21 Oct 2009 05:56:58 -0000

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alfred HÎnes" <ah@TR-Sys.de>
To: <draft-yao-dnsop-idntld-implementation@cabernet.tools.IETF.ORG>
Cc: <namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>; <dnsop@ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 9:53 PM
Subject: [DNSOP] draft-yao-dnsop-idntld-implementation-00 and DNAME


> Authors:
> 
> I fear that Sections 3 ff. of draft-yao-dnsop-idntld-implementation-00
> have entirely missed the evolution of the dnesext-rfc2672-dname draft.
> 
> The "Understand DNAME" bit, and hence the dependence on EDNS has been
> removed in June, and it has been reinforced that support for DNAME
> does not require support for EDNS0 (although recent empirical data
> have shown that ENDS0 support is almost pervasive for authoritative
> servers and recursive resolvers in these days, and, as you know,
> IPv6 makes EDNS0 effectively mandatory, and DNSSEC does the same).
> 
> This clarification of RFC 2672 has the support of major implementors
> and implementations.
> 
> I suppose that this evolution has made moot much of the discussion
> in your draft.  So please could you revise it based on the current
> understanding of DNAME ?

ok, I will do some updatings.


> 
> Namedroppers:
> 
> What's the state of draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2672bis-dname ?
> IIRC, there was no substantial discussion on the list since -17
> has been posted in September.
> Are the chairs now working on bringing that draft to the IESG?
> 
> DNSOP folks:
> 
> Are there sound empirical data on DNAME support at large?
> 
> Reportedly, DNAME already is in heavy use in ENUM deployments.
> I've never heard complaints from ENUM folks about issues with
> DNAME -- or did I miss smething?

enum is not widely deployed. as far as I know, there are few enum users in the world.


> 
> 
> Kind regards,
>  Alfred HÎnes.
> 
> -- 
> 
> +------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
> | TR-Sys Alfred Hoenes   |  Alfred Hoenes   Dipl.-Math., Dipl.-Phys.  |
> | Gerlinger Strasse 12   |  Phone: (+49)7156/9635-0, Fax: -18         |
> | D-71254  Ditzingen     |  E-Mail:  ah@TR-Sys.de                     |
> +------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>