IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [homenet] I-D Action: draft-ietf-homenet-dot-10.txt

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Mon, 31 July 2017 16:04 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E00E4132608 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:04:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 0K9WiM4sjav4 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:04:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x236.google.com (mail-qk0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::236]) (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 09D89131723 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:04:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x236.google.com with SMTP id d136so154659452qkg.3 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:04:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=lPV4SsIwUanE87BwQDYKqBRQGOzjRdS0/rqYiHzIrRU=; b=sbFwQXuS+toC5y/4Kdtt2Lc9Z35JGfsAuSDphp4hxutC77Bj/oYoXuzOZVxkDbAg4Z qOAc1vEmSWDZ/zCKpBQdD670IK7HJXWYD/6657MgHVcRRhXDUg5kNFHH8BQpOLaoVQxL C3dv2AG5hsLYeqo2/mwRt9QVGStW3FQYR+85gfUnYi4bBHTiNTk/eW549ZwP6IXhAws3 g+kplPa8sfVgLlUJYPIw9xuynYQTSAENlfw9DbsvN8xhVp0z44yYw8CnnG7hEBIqg9dV b7eGIqnmd4H9VofKkoDuXSvQU7EdxqUip109D3xL59WrGTVWaSUt+C9HgJGXLYfBnWHD QaiA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=lPV4SsIwUanE87BwQDYKqBRQGOzjRdS0/rqYiHzIrRU=; b=S5FG/YVGAIqAXE1swo1BvZWDMXhT3ezIvl3nipYtpqGNgrxRrDRIB7RuoQVfmW9IhX ddGzi3IjXXVDtwcHyuERwjsAi9ca7rlXJ1IEkOxdy/Fgi6Lay/VI8vb6aYyveDmZaCSC xTkG3WBNXryzX7d7wYJjPDrF02SMAdUbxOkhMjQQCaT3sEyMfgRu/DvJgkTdnotRwuuL STgxyJXYO2jjNWRfHrvVJQ8WzqxdwiMNdjSfS/IoIzcZl+jgfNeOUmaEoz18TFsBO3m7 WywIDDZiMdU3dvudTX+ApDXUTypKt6F0hi0HxSXosKl2n5cavoYUup3NaZpODOm9jpIp 60Yw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw110GfQabyDKP1Lx1Tkygh9zNWYYNPkR6MZ9sjTTMYKKmnIDIyDCs vpDRUUPsmQHMnSG8
X-Received: by 10.55.27.83 with SMTP id b80mr20201278qkb.148.1501517052920; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:04:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.30.153] (c-73-167-64-188.hsd1.nh.comcast.net. [73.167.64.188]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q185sm19833904qkb.45.2017.07.31.09.04.11 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:04:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Message-Id: <D76593C4-F7B5-4382-B63A-09DE75D919CA@fugue.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_EE18DCB9-CB08-4BE7-8211-6792D9272063"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:04:10 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAHw9_iKamMKHxovw7cxhHsZgrZvMLp2oUjchRVcTMA75tFbosw@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>, homenet@ietf.org
To: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
References: <150127266271.25329.18484770769960144@ietfa.amsl.com> <20170731050206.1A431806F1C2@rock.dv.isc.org> <916EEEB9-3709-492B-8E19-5C832B11AFC2@fugue.com> <CAHw9_iKamMKHxovw7cxhHsZgrZvMLp2oUjchRVcTMA75tFbosw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/tFfdGpg1gl0zuo3-o6ccZP9FTbA>
Subject: Re: [homenet] I-D Action: draft-ietf-homenet-dot-10.txt
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 16:04:16 -0000

On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:42 AM, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:
> It really is an insecure delegation, not an unsigned delegation --
> calling it unsigned would be confusing to many people. The person I
> was discussing it with wasn't aware of the term "insecure delegation"
> and assumed that it meant an "unsigned delegation", which is, um,
> difficult to achieve in a non-NSEC3 OO zone...

Ah, I wrote that text not imagining that .arpa was signed using good old-fashioned NSEC, which was silly of me.   That said, I would rather not rely on interpretations of terminology the meaning of which isn't agreed upon.   I think it would be better to simply specify that there will be no DS record.   Does that make sense, or is there some reason why we have to say "unsigned?"

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email