Re: [dnssd] SRP deletes?
Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Mon, 26 August 2019 01:04 UTC
Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED6CC1200A1 for <dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Aug 2019 18:04:32 -0700 (PDT)
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, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 QfOW8kJgGSrJ for <dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Aug 2019 18:04:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x830.google.com (mail-qt1-x830.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::830]) (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 D05A112001E for <dnssd@ietf.org>; Sun, 25 Aug 2019 18:04:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x830.google.com with SMTP id t12so16444806qtp.9 for <dnssd@ietf.org>; Sun, 25 Aug 2019 18:04:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=26pE6rCdJvWdMKnsrIzpaRhKUN54Smg6F0BW+K7I7e8=; b=zl8QYfnY7KNrMxyS64nBYdLSRW6gv3+ErDtkr47XsxNMgsZDDDiClZV0Bcw51mv+4O iDeaQQPM9W6oyMLPsCKji85KSZfhMeGd3YAjhp0wgvuNdOHDDS3wUUNP61+iRlpM+X4i LFh6lLFGGVK7GNGKst4dQVURhJgbCFhAF7JV2tgjHUk/TYCzyphEy0xT11xlx5PmPl6x dmsWvqtnc0KiFDNY9qzXIVlTnybBfgSfIbYTH6PorEsqeBYPSEzg3PsUDoUEaSK5WOuc rq8/RafLf6zWWeBw1+EHQMTUMI+AcdVnfk9UpBTjdIL8s4dfGEIB/V354JinRr3nSXdL pPNg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=26pE6rCdJvWdMKnsrIzpaRhKUN54Smg6F0BW+K7I7e8=; b=TUFD5kihoc20FYNbIB5CX8ua63XP8wetB6nUiOhgqy2ZswGG4oguoAshRuu82LLSx6 QJfWqAhM0p+RXVd7aEMeTLWjOPmu7NBExZ6N94nHMt6XqtvXdmfUMlnxFY/fwwvDWQ4k oRlMd2En6LMdQ1naGytT0ivF36tgwu7U2OqQNBruKyF6cckEh3zJjdzTHhdH4DOVeX8V Q7oBCj39Ve7fWMB/RSYX1zJTMdkItsdVJybHNQ2lUJPEDEVG/qRNs/h79MRsg1g/4VuA W2Eur/jeiuxa0HHiWqisNFo0fy71cmfPRjdJm3NJDyZqZ/oFAQAlEv2wNNlIpfvONtzf +ohA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVU0x9zKhbwVfXl5Xcj/E0HjuuWrQyFy+DrBm/TSt/neFqah6kx NCrbDVioG2w/NcUEOxwj8sWvhXbupawuUHM7
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy4GsakpaPPOlMByQ0KFKV0z/9IeP8ftf+tZ0P1WvpXOdPB+1aa/TN7S0iaSmQ1JTpDosfOBQ==
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7b46:: with SMTP id m6mr15192072qtu.389.1566781469764; Sun, 25 Aug 2019 18:04:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.100.56] (c-73-186-137-119.hsd1.nh.comcast.net. [73.186.137.119]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g14sm5452362qki.14.2019.08.25.18.04.28 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 25 Aug 2019 18:04:29 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 21:04:27 -0400
Message-Id: <58E1C523-170A-486A-BC12-FC3DBB6E9306@fugue.com>
References: <03C30161-2520-4A6F-A52F-18034D2141A0@bangj.com>
Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, DNSSD <dnssd@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <03C30161-2520-4A6F-A52F-18034D2141A0@bangj.com>
To: Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17A574)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnssd/W-Wr3UUHEpid0zWtTKShvOIpAEA>
Subject: Re: [dnssd] SRP deletes?
X-BeenThere: dnssd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of extensions to DNS-based service discovery for routed networks." <dnssd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnssd>, <mailto:dnssd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnssd/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnssd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnssd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnssd>, <mailto:dnssd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 01:04:33 -0000
On Aug 25, 2019, at 20:46, Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com> wrote: > > Eventually, the records (whether directly or through an SRP Proxy) get into an authoritative DNS server. If you want special behavior in response to an RFC 2136 Update at the authoritative, then you’ll need to specify that. Otherwise, the KEY can be deleted along with any of the other records Updates only ever get processed on the primary authoritative server. Updates can delete some or all records. So we are free to choose the behavior we want. The question is, what behavior do we want? :)
- Re: [dnssd] SRP deletes? Michael Richardson
- Re: [dnssd] SRP deletes? Ted Lemon
- [dnssd] SRP deletes? Ted Lemon
- Re: [dnssd] SRP deletes? Tom Pusateri
- Re: [dnssd] SRP deletes? Ted Lemon