IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Last Call: <draft-iab-2870bis-01.txt> (DNS Root Name Service Protocol and Deployment Requirements) to Best Current Practice

David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> Fri, 30 May 2014 19:06 UTC

Return-Path: <drc@virtualized.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75EFC1A04A1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 May 2014 12:06:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, J_CHICKENPOX_81=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=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 ASqSL4pRWCxy for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 May 2014 12:06:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pd0-f170.google.com (mail-pd0-f170.google.com [209.85.192.170]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D2411A046B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 May 2014 12:06:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pd0-f170.google.com with SMTP id g10so1256617pdj.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 May 2014 12:06:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=j5VRJnIoUaSsTVuJFu/a987wb4J85ea+tMM6OKsCEsw=; b=Eblm8EfP3DSgMUXmbZINNAxG+UIXyW8IrYXtGoMi7sUCbd7CaOOTMHiCpVi900ww+h IMBCPimjoO9JMBfDMnnRFbmITIOplbymMmDz1j5KerwjeFSa99Omqy8bqa7fONlpE+IN FfX1gU5OzDdXi/8vOSWkqqpKC+imzkIa/XosbXCO39/0JD7khWUswRVlPtu71/0a8GpU jdWRR0EeTLL+WrC4B0kc9xk8VZOumRcJ3Pd+s426j4diScTRlrshNCwhzB84J9Ux9M6i FV1roAJcX8Ax9jpsZpJdaX+K+LbyXcMKdOcXdGXiy6EugOZXSPQPcpFeAWWviPtEBsen qxmA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlJAEL4dZRt9YyzdrnL3Y+p7cLLeyyFdjjKBU0/Uu590yxeZxsx2Q9kCg04ZseglJ4G3aCT
X-Received: by 10.66.231.40 with SMTP id td8mr21181012pac.103.1401476798048; Fri, 30 May 2014 12:06:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.3] (c-24-6-168-86.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.6.168.86]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id zc10sm22370556pac.46.2014.05.30.12.06.36 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 30 May 2014 12:06:36 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D1C0A85B-DC7D-440C-B32B-65BE18395082"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\))
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-iab-2870bis-01.txt> (DNS Root Name Service Protocol and Deployment Requirements) to Best Current Practice
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <580E7AB4-10B6-44C5-AF6E-A3A87E082BCE@frobbit.se>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 12:06:26 -0700
Message-Id: <059382B7-3101-4ECB-819E-2B5748ACDC88@virtualized.org>
References: <20140520204238.21772.64347.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20140521194638.06eaf508@resistor.net> <1111FB79-012A-414B-B8CD-0BBDAE8BD6A8@hopcount.ca> <6.2.5.6.2.20140522095317.0c5fd648@elandnews.com> <5C02BCCA-79D7-40A5-BFB0-26284A667E78@vpnc.org> <DC9ED318-2352-4AF0-8A43-29D237C32B64@vigilsec.com> <924045CD-DC34-423B-8702-CD99CF687D46@vpnc.org> <31344.1401304682@sandelman.ca> <BF0C8B7B-27D0-40B8-8FBD-5D255951222F@ericsson.com> <538795FB.6060205@gmail.com> <5387A307.4000903@gmail.com> <70E8B2EF-FD92-4DEF-BA98-0604041B0C30@isi.edu> <5388AA1B.1050803@gmail.com> <46AF19CF-C4F9-4D8A-94CC-4B3BF5FD67BD@virtualized.org> <580E7AB4-10B6-44C5-AF6E-A3A87E082BCE@frobbit.se>
To: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.2)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/HtXsdqsne2tlUJW51tG6qwFrk2I
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 19:06:44 -0000

On May 30, 2014, at 10:26 AM, Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> wrote:
>> I guess I just don't see the point. I suppose it doesn't really do any harm, but as Patrik states, it isn't going to have any impact so why bother? 
> Because without documents like these there will be no chance what so ever of having someone hitting the root server operator(s?) in the head with it.

And that has worked so well in the past with root service? As mentioned, the IETF has published other documents on root server operational behavior with less than stellar results. I personally do not see much value in the IETF repeatedly writing documents that are simply ignored (the opposite, actually).

This is not to say that I feel documenting recommendations (not requirements) aren't of value, particularly if those recommendations are objectively justified (e.g., "IPv6 should be supported to ensure IPv6-only service operates on par with IPv4-only service" or something). Draft-iab-2870bis-01.txt doesn't do this. Draft-iab-2870bis-01.txt pretends the IETF (IAB?) has the ability to dictate how an operational service MUST be provided without any explanation or rationale.

Regards,
-drc

P.S. I also find it odd this is coming out of the IAB. Why this isn't a DNSOP document? It is sort of related to DNS Operations, no?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email