Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: Message Digest for DNS Zones

Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net> Wed, 15 January 2020 00:52 UTC

Return-Path: <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
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 00D5F120046 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 16:52:45 -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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 Y3yWczXO83Dh for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 16:52:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.hardakers.net (mail.hardakers.net [168.150.192.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E170B12002F for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 16:52:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (unknown [10.0.0.3]) by mail.hardakers.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7DC852E5CC; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 16:52:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
To: Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com>
Cc: "Wessels\, Duane" <dwessels@verisign.com>, "dnsop\@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
References: <CADyWQ+G1w9_vcU3oO9MsKcP4hTLPXKFb+xY7LJGExbAfjzsDMw@mail.gmail.com> <84650844-1d13-9377-c913-23dcbc76dc37@nthpermutation.com> <C4EB59C4-EA83-4DBE-84D0-D8D43735B63D@verisign.com> <7f298591-09b5-dd7c-0dab-afc60def874b@nthpermutation.com> <D9E20677-B76F-4028-A283-6FA5DEEC22AE@verisign.com> <b3132d4a-8b91-27ff-83af-0204a47ec2c3@nthpermutation.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 16:52:42 -0800
In-Reply-To: <b3132d4a-8b91-27ff-83af-0204a47ec2c3@nthpermutation.com> (Michael StJohns's message of "Wed, 8 Jan 2020 14:18:45 -0500")
Message-ID: <yblftghfsmd.fsf@w7.hardakers.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/yoDwYsV580G83F4l034yAOsPvUk>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: Message Digest for DNS Zones
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: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 00:52:45 -0000

Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com> writes:

> This is sort of what I meant.  Still trying to get the authors to home
> in a definition for small/static and large/dynamic.

Random thought while reading the thread: we could state something very
small and simple rather than trying to approximate the future growth in
computing and DNS data sizes simultaneously.  Instead we could say
something simple like (word smithing needed) "ZONEMD is likely not a
suitable solution for zones where the calculations required to create
the record on the DNS operator's infrastructure takes longer than 1/10th
the average zone update frequency."


-- 
Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI