[DNSOP] the power of ideas

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Mon, 03 April 2017 20:00 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78EE9120726 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Apr 2017 13:00:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yx_23SQG_46w for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Apr 2017 13:00:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [IPv6:2001:559:8000:cd::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08303129501 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Apr 2017 13:00:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linux-hs2j.localnet (unknown []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 449AF61F9C; Mon, 3 Apr 2017 20:00:57 +0000 (UTC)
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Cc: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>, Dan York <york@isoc.org>
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2017 20:00:56 +0000
Message-ID: <7458227.fcc3KKjKTW@linux-hs2j>
Organization: Vixie Freehold
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.20.999.1704031546230.16478@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <CA+nkc8Bwc6eQz6YPAnMLNjvHm4POLTyvsTRQC5Pn+R4iTzaB-g@mail.gmail.com> <3A4E2834-2BD4-4DC3-9D5A-A15B3DCDA738@isoc.org> <alpine.LRH.2.20.999.1704031546230.16478@bofh.nohats.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/xW3pvAqinTLK3feLJs36KVV_s-4>
Subject: [DNSOP] the power of ideas
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, 03 Apr 2017 20:00:59 -0000

On Monday, April 3, 2017 7:48:49 PM GMT Paul Wouters wrote:
> ...
> As Evan said, there should not be any code in an authoritative server
> that requires it to do recursive validation.

in the internet dns as practiced, our choice is not whether an idea thought by 
some to be "bad", as in, "a bad idea", will be widely implemented.

our only choice is whether such ideas are documented, interoperable, and 
subject to fine tuning by the rest of the community.

as someone who finds most ideas bad, i often wish this weren't so. as someone 
whose ideas are often thought to be bad by others, i am often glad that this 
is so.

in any case, it is so. ideas, good or bad, plus implementation, creates 
relevance. that relevance stands independent of the perceived goodness or 
badness of the ideas themselves.

with or without an applicability statement, the underlying message of an rfc 
from the dnsop working group is not "we think this is good engineering" but 
rather "if you want to do this in a way that interoperates with others who are 
also doing it, here is one way to achieve that result."

so, phrases like "should not be" are irrelevant in this place at this time.