IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] ANAME in answer or additional section [issue #62]

Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> Wed, 12 June 2019 01:35 UTC

Return-Path: <jabley@hopcount.ca>
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 0254D12009C for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:35:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=hopcount.ca
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 pKBnEYfIveke for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x132.google.com (mail-lf1-x132.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::132]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0037120089 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:35:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x132.google.com with SMTP id b11so10732991lfa.5 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:35:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopcount.ca; s=google; h=from:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=vtAbqEO+6IoMOJoWqtM7Vjk77C1GabjMMqFwxVFcyoc=; b=JiDb+b2gLKiy/jreFPehAvmfTN1zZ1JyDhNeejWHF3cmz51BFBzDD4J+uSRV6WcCIj jNOoNvZuTMPrrktBRSRUMj7MRqxZSH+9juOVl3pJwCtCpQ2Io7y4kdq2w3osy2LJ3JGK rm8+uTzbJYiCJ/YeURLtkk3RzcPgehMLNFrAE=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=vtAbqEO+6IoMOJoWqtM7Vjk77C1GabjMMqFwxVFcyoc=; b=aYl0Cyl3yEOCWGF+nW/BB3DdKPjnnVivRkLTY1ZLvMBCYqDcmeiXwSbxzYHJhRR+Uo FO28i28m9jsuEN+p3oc8BvJgDY3XG1jZcWwAsvSffly2VBaOZc4uC7Ez8wAoXSoaCmXX uZaIWjsRfP9TapVJyfurA5l6aYxHiyH/0FmvMMXq0kCk2d6L8zkA6068HBqrLQvcJqiN 7JO0iCYo3od07B8OPyddRgCrmFdqoIePUllWwiGY0Xw6c1ZshH2JUUqPJlOyUAj9zyeR Nl2b1MR81BQUzqJzUqInQvz2/faP4qPqwIEFGC0rfSuo+6saiW/VMn1U/OOlcSsumiOV 3M5w==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWF6CDCjN42KSLNf4Yy6SWwl0KF6uol6Li6lqvcm7bnF/9uGQB4 hRbgo24TeA8pNlXusGfiyAmvpo8BPU8Qcl5Mac1tMmUwn4E=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwFxI1rRt+iIcMeNFs2kkajO/GPE2nxWsubg923sIz3i/qzrkpxGL/F1+VBikiXZ8iAi7/xLttzh5LbQlkGjQM=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5ecd:: with SMTP id d13mr27215714lfq.132.1560303298988; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:34:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unknown named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:34:58 -0700
From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
References: <3b136e34-7ec0-e144-2c2a-0885185ec2b1@pletterpet.nl> <20190612000459.GA60387@isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20190612000459.GA60387@isc.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:34:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJhMdTP-iDbbgnCDV7WRhbh495KvhOW3cGS+0tu74VAoYfU=gg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Evan Hunt <each@isc.org>
Cc: Matthijs Mekking <matthijs@pletterpet.nl>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/zDCloli8woPdwyenKmUINMcocy8>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] ANAME in answer or additional section [issue #62]
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, 12 Jun 2019 01:35:03 -0000

On Jun 11, 2019, at 20:04, Evan Hunt <each@isc.org> wrote:

> MHO, the ANAME is the real answer we're sending; the A and AAAA records
> are just friendly hand-holding for legacy servers.  It doesn't make sense
> to me to demote the real answer into the additional section, any more than
> it would have to move DNAME there. The protocol specificaions are clear on
> this point - the more so considering we've already deployed DNAME - and my
> sympathies for an implementation that got it wrong would be limited.

I think DNAME provides a useful example. I think emulating DNAME's
demonstrated success in both being tolerated and interpreted correctly
is useful.


Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email