Re: [DNSOP] Comment on Ranking data

Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk> Fri, 05 April 2024 15:18 UTC

Return-Path: <ray@bellis.me.uk>
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 94C0EC14F70A for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Apr 2024 08:18:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=portfast.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ntyAL_OuHVHW for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Apr 2024 08:18:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.portfast.net (mail.portfast.net [IPv6:2a03:9800:20:1::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C28CCC14F60D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Apr 2024 08:18:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=portfast.net; s=dkim; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: From:References:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Sender:Reply-To:Cc: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=Mv8dWjC/ZSl4tGFFdJ/pFndflfwzun/8tQT0M0qNJgo=; b=lwpaThKmGD63S8g5DXjIC0uotA EzzU3ji+5JX/0hFPxqo9OK0euLBjL2PhJQHzChxyNC4aQfjbJbTxBeD49sF55v4zMfjVOL0XbEJSO Lruj5ES+QYfQgrx1UtuYL8lb4Snyr7wq/xlJK1VvgJYWgzLvcLDZIFcfjneLT5TupwV0=;
Received: from [216.213.177.68] (port=52162 helo=[10.1.2.71]) by mail.portfast.net ([188.246.200.9]:465) with esmtpsa (fixed_plain:ray@bellis.me.uk) (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_128_GCM:128) id 1rslKj-005CtX-1x (Exim 4.96) for dnsop@ietf.org (return-path <ray@bellis.me.uk>); Fri, 05 Apr 2024 16:18:25 +0100
Message-ID: <38904c7d-e54f-46c4-a122-841bc7cc7c02@bellis.me.uk>
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2024 16:18:25 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-GB
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <20240405.162847.2106826176991704565.fujiwara@jprs.co.jp> <733d93c0-0b20-4c26-8bc1-6f60190c12e0@nlnetlabs.nl>
From: Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>
In-Reply-To: <733d93c0-0b20-4c26-8bc1-6f60190c12e0@nlnetlabs.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/ynDoPL772KCtFZ_W-iA2WuzUu-o>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Comment on Ranking data
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Fri, 05 Apr 2024 15:18:34 -0000


On 05/04/2024 15:04, Willem Toorop wrote:

> I also think the draft should be more explicit on what data is actually 
> meant in those ranks (i.e. referral responses with "B: Data from the 
> authority section of a non-authoritative answer, Additional information 
> from non-authoritative answers." etc.) and I also agree that we should 
> remove the ranks which are currently meaningless and would not occur in 
> practice (like the BB ranks in the list). I furthermore agree with your 
> recommendation for DNS software to discard all data which is not in the 
> list.

Probably related - I'd be quite interested in info and/or guidance about 
how exactly recursive resolvers process and/or trust the value of the AA 
bit sent by authoritative servers.

Is that bit "informational only", or does it in fact still play a role 
in recursive resolvers' logic?

Ray