IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] AD bit

Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Thu, 08 March 2012 21:13 UTC

Return-Path: <dnsext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB36021E8061; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 13:13:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1331241206; bh=gcYVUi46y/wRf64HOBjjvl/y0AkV2d+uIzG9xDPuJUc=; h=To:From:References:In-reply-to:Date:Message-Id:Cc:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Sender; b=YyMPVe/gmcEZB5JfU1Iv/XC4B/Y1G1LzZJtuGLAMO54S3kta/nG+oyEsGupoLyLjx uXJ3UXXQeO7GT0HkOlwT8fDe9ZU/0+Oklp0vjhdYIOTcyHNy5bR9MQ67pAoNxVA1J+ IwDiy9R2/5jjxSkTQ9GwMOksbn1V4XpnJeklhnJM=
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B70F321E8062 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 13:13:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.479
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.479 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.180, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U5hEX7zkWw7Q for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 13:13:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ams1.isc.org (mx.ams1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:500:60::65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26D0021E805D for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 13:13:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bikeshed.isc.org (bikeshed.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:d::19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.isc.org", Issuer "RapidSSL CA" (not verified)) by mx.ams1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DF1D5F9891; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 21:13:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org)
Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:820:5df4:2bae:698c:ea04]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7489A216C33; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 21:13:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org)
Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by drugs.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C4571E33AF8; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 08:12:53 +1100 (EST)
To: Alfred Hönes <ah@TR-Sys.de>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
References: <201203081531.QAA22801@TR-Sys.de>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:31:53 BST." <201203081531.QAA22801@TR-Sys.de>
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 08:12:52 +1100
Message-Id: <20120308211254.0C4571E33AF8@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Cc: dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] AD bit
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org

In message <201203081531.QAA22801@TR-Sys.de>, Alfred =?hp-roman8?B?SM5uZXM=?= w
rites:
> At Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:11:52 +1100, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > In message <20120304205347.GA17454 at miek.nl>, Miek Gieben writes:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> As RFC 4035 obsoletes both RFC 3655 and RFC 2535, what document should
> >> be used to find the definition of the AD and CD bits in the message header
> ?
> >>
> >>  Regards,
> >>
> >> --
> >>     Miek Gieben
> >
> > Currently RFC 2535.
> 
> I don't think so.
> 
> RFCs 4033 and 4035 have obsoleted RFCs 2535 and 3655.  We should
> not give citations of obsolete documents as normative sources.

[snip]

> The IANA assigned placement information for both bits has been
> maintained in RFC 6195 and its predecessors as well.

I wasn't worried about the use, just the location.

	The bits locations were defined in RFC 2535.

	RFC 2535 -> RFC 2929 -> RFC5395 -> RFC6195

	When 403[45] replaced RFC 2535 the definition of the
	location of the bits got orphaned.

I guess RFC 4034 should have had RFC 2929 as a normative reference for
the location of AD and CD.  The rest of the header bits are defined in
RFC 1035.

Mark

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email