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: Ondřej Surý <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> ("Ondřej Surý"'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
- [nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter) Jelte Jansen
- Re: [nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter) Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter) jad
- Re: [nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter) Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter) jad
- Re: [nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter) Jeffrey Hutzelman
- [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or not? (… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Lars-Johan Liman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Lars-Johan Liman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Ondřej Surý
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Jeffrey Hutzelman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Jeffrey Hutzelman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Ondřej Surý
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Tony Finch
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Edward Lewis
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Wes Hardaker
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Tony Finch
- [nscp] Proposed wording for the charter Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Jeffrey Hutzelman