Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or not?

Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net> Mon, 20 September 2010 21:07 UTC

Return-Path: <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
X-Original-To: nscp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nscp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A55A3A6820 for <nscp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 14:07:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Rerb2KU1orVL for <nscp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 14:07:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.hardakers.net (hardaker-pt.tunnel.tserv1.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:ffff::af]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 238093A689C for <nscp@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 14:07:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (wjh.hardakers.net [10.0.0.2]) by mail.hardakers.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0EC2698072; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 14:07:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
To: =?utf-8?B?T25kxZllaiBTdXLDvQ==?= <ondrej@sury.org>
Organization: Sparta
References: <4C9091C8.1030702@isc.org> <p062408d6c8b692e2c226@10.20.30.158> <A5289BAE-189D-4FF0-8AEC-2CCDC06D3B43@sinodun.com> <p062408dbc8b6aaf55b1a@10.20.30.158> <F41F5A3D292BA66474A70422@minbar.fac.cs.cmu.edu> <20100916130131.GA29091@nic.fr> <p0624081fc8b7e8b23cc0@10.20.30.158> <22r5gtcwtj.fsf@ziptop.autonomica.net> <p06240837c8b839e8f192@10.20.30.158> <22k4mlbb6k.fsf@ziptop.autonomica.net> <p0624083ac8b8499641a3@10.20.30.158> <4C6A8B95E7FAF06E143D9425@minbar.fac.cs.cmu.edu> <p0624086fc8b998cb98d6@10.20.30.158> <076D7E021C1972DBD3D412B8@minbar.fac.cs.cmu.edu> <AANLkTikbeJSrc0Xp6-=AhWU1LYYcwtNHT2sRGhubVC==@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 14:07:37 -0700
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikbeJSrc0Xp6-=AhWU1LYYcwtNHT2sRGhubVC==@mail.gmail.com> (=?utf-8?Q?=22Ond=C5=99ej_Sur=C3=BD=22's?= message of "Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:25:52 +0200")
Message-ID: <sd62y0yvhi.fsf@wjh.hardakers.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: nscp@ietf.org, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or not?
X-BeenThere: nscp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Nameserver control/configuration protocol discussion list <nscp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nscp>, <mailto:nscp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nscp>
List-Post: <mailto:nscp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nscp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nscp>, <mailto:nscp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 21:07:16 -0000

>>>>> On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:25:52 +0200, Ondřej Surý <ondrej@sury.org>; said:

OS> Well, you should probably explain why do you think we need
OS> yet-another-protocol for managing zone contents.

FYI, as a point of historical reference, the discussion in the dcoma
group went something like this:

1) we already have protocols for transferring zone data
2) we don't have any way, however, to create "initial zones".  IE, the
   missing piece is the ability to send an SOA record to bootstrap the
   nameserver into saying "add this new zone to your authoritative list"
3) we agreed that although existing solutions worked just fine for
   updating zone date once the server was configured to serve that zone,
   we didn't want to "restrict the future".
4) having said that, there was no one in the rooms/list (of many people)
   that thought a new protocol should be used for transferring zone data
   because the existing ones were likely sufficient.

However, one point of netconf is the ability to do a complete
dump/restore of config data and you wouldn't want to exclude the zone
data from that dump/restore set.

IMHO, for a long term solution the results must include the ability to
manage zone data.  It doesn't necessarily need to be in the first
version of the resulting management framework.  Though you could leave
it out of version 1.0, it's a very very important piece to solve "in the
long-term, big-picture"
-- 
Wes Hardaker
Cobham Analytic Solutions