IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] IANA Policy for SVCB

Petr Špaček <pspacek@isc.org> Tue, 22 March 2022 09:21 UTC

Return-Path: <pspacek@isc.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 88BB83A0C9A for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 02:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.108 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=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isc.org header.b=E54KDKE6; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isc.org header.b=CMvJVp1F
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 jf_aWXd1RVkx for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 02:20:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.pao1.isc.org (mx.pao1.isc.org [149.20.64.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C946F3A0923 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 02:20:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zimbrang.isc.org (zimbrang.isc.org [149.20.1.12]) (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 mx.pao1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 026BD3AB015 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 09:20:53 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mx.pao1.isc.org 026BD3AB015
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=isc.org; s=ostpay; t=1647940853; bh=KYcqkABMUmX2OtsvDiKzLEuGFYw/5bizz9FMbhiOqVc=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=E54KDKE6uSwjmvzkER67DwNh0Cqm9MshwrcjktK4kjqhwvUsoLGyocC8SpuD9JMNN JnGNRBDTjUahUlYWXBEd1vhRV4X2gII6lbUBI3vOj48mTpshz2oOg8zagHlN1W4IAY ABa3ieD+UOIE1f4M5sky1Zj0i7zO8HsKilrdTL/o=
Received: from zimbrang.isc.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zimbrang.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B18921100536 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 09:20:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zimbrang.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C78B1101380 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 09:20:16 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 zimbrang.isc.org 8C78B1101380
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isc.org; s=05DFB016-56A2-11EB-AEC0-15368D323330; t=1647940816; bh=O8O4Z/a0z8Aaep6b2tE1IqIcXTCpLD1BlOHfgWaOG8I=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:To:From; b=CMvJVp1FP14aYKGnspMqkuKdE2zD0TAHxC6vOejS+XA71mSRguvcC16LWeRDswzRG 4vzDb6DlD6cxrkUz+mRZFpNHixBIEq6HLSV8uVOhlrC6hneZobCCe8KeN2sYsJXYQk jx3PRHifi03/FeP2+/F8OMk5qLVZuBiQOUsiVl4M=
Received: from zimbrang.isc.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbrang.isc.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 2qYupHCMcM2T for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 09:20:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [31.133.128.139] (dhcp-808b.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.128.139]) by zimbrang.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 018221100536 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 09:20:15 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <ec33a5ff-6139-d2f5-88a7-76222a561f33@isc.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 10:20:51 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <CAHbrMsB5Lhm+cUoEzXwwKn74pBCrAOB+wnJG8ATscxkh7zSvLQ@mail.gmail.com> <CB1A7714-C6BD-4D54-8784-709153D9651E@rfc1035.com>
From: Petr Špaček <pspacek@isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <CB1A7714-C6BD-4D54-8784-709153D9651E@rfc1035.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/xXHfm8gxcZOpYz3v0g4LYuoUnhw>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] IANA Policy for SVCB
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: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 09:21:01 -0000

On 21. 03. 22 10:37, Jim Reid wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 21 Mar 2022, at 09:19, Ben Schwartz <bemasc=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>> Personally, I favor #3.  What do you think?
>   
> Ben, I think 2 (Expert Review) is the right approach. This would hopefully ensure any specifications are complete/valid and raise the threshold to discourage bad or frivolous SrvParamValues "registrations".
> 
> An Expert Review seems right to me. It's culturally compatible with how we handle the allocation of new RRtypes.

+1 for Expert Review for reasons stated by Jim. I don't see #3 as really 
needed.

-- 
Petr Špaček

v2.45.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status