IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Delegation acceptance checks [was: Re: [Ext] WGLC rfc8499bis one week extension for lame delegation definition]

John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 12 May 2023 17:59 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
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 8D259C1524B3 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 May 2023 10:59:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=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 (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b="cCzxnR4K"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b="dJeo5CaX"
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 etIAr7YD4a9P for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 May 2023 10:58:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDDFAC1524DB for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 May 2023 10:58:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 33117 invoked from network); 12 May 2023 17:58:33 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=8159.645e7e49.k2305; bh=JDp3lwUXfdNBJSANWqV2XVpS6+Wvg2HMbR71PCTmhhM=; b=cCzxnR4KpsJXn4/IrdMOsk3CufOKXMrK4EFGZ9C9irWIs47GAaFlaaw+UijzLxVL+JUGpEoU6jVnH9OJ38SJpkTn8xSuoQDWwsHEUYXnnFSGKGV2mmRNHOMbC3uMazcw31QFpJYpD3kxtibscYqMoHoxY7alODHNgeBIVtsHUbMtOtVFGdDqj1Ph7UP4lGfTxJp5e0Z9XQRu+uSzwAyYHv7DBgPcm/qQxT5FrchLWjveDeVn5jo2GIm5BgnxmkEQdVq+LcKiPen1OIE5sXQhlO+EFnNlKd+Rtvq+ALtAmgPN9FMO4hBrZl7rGwAPFIehpLgSsJmu1yyGAYy0NEggcw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=8159.645e7e49.k2305; bh=JDp3lwUXfdNBJSANWqV2XVpS6+Wvg2HMbR71PCTmhhM=; b=dJeo5CaXT/szTwj53e5t0SZkcYdtyqYCoEW+itKGRKPA90RZePLUFP/Spd/Gb9aLvrOWbS1yxDZ8RlsWXW3gP03pFCebjEOZ+4sy0usLEJcSpwL8Mzjp17nrzAZ2jrwG25zdZRYT1S6bLA0DkRCP+7OM9juNepHTIY3RzIWsm22xpIhXd4TPephM7lE+bWYiEy0Q6yhx1HTm5k1ipJ+gOABgaEq+4mZLyyxxHfc9qFlX0rcboOBS1ZIVnEle9+iwLBo2QxAnmQvW4Oi4d7z4c29jsC5oRN3Ba8PbLoOukQt8QGKFmjL3GNIJWeG51TKTqDMlS9lYZaSsB5Cjks9I1Q==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 12 May 2023 17:58:32 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 994C3D6F51ED; Fri, 12 May 2023 13:43:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ary.qy (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5273D6F38B8; Fri, 12 May 2023 13:43:43 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 12 May 2023 13:43:43 -0400
Message-ID: <8fbdb8d6-1e5b-6be7-5e4c-2794da89aef8@taugh.com>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
X-X-Sender: johnl@ary.qy
In-Reply-To: <54FE973E-0F74-4E6A-A8A6-049DEBB4C264@isc.org>
References: <20230512013510.2ACD2D670AF9@ary.qy> <A7E2E387-559B-4623-8218-887ED583F57E@isc.org> <331e7b86-dc5c-5589-9cbb-b3331bc972b8@taugh.com> <54FE973E-0F74-4E6A-A8A6-049DEBB4C264@isc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/zsOOIxJPPljYD_WG2eimWWuP8aU>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Delegation acceptance checks [was: Re: [Ext] WGLC rfc8499bis one week extension for lame delegation definition]
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, 12 May 2023 17:59:00 -0000

>>>> Yeah, that's a better way to put it. But the main point still stands,
>>>> that it would be a signficant operational change to insist that all
>>>> delegated NS be active when delegated, and even moreso to insist that
>>>> they continue to be active. ...

>> Well, OK, you do that, half the emails bounce, half of what's delivered is reported as spam, and the third half are ignored.  Now what?
>
> In practice it isn’t quite as bad as that.  Require registrars to refuse
> renewals until the issues are addressed.

Please see "signficant operational change" above.

My feeling is that if it's not important enough for *you* to have your DNS 
working, it's not important for *me* either.  I'm happy to help people who 
are having trouble fixing problems, but not to waste time on people who 
don't care.

R's,
John

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status