IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Drip] [dnsdir] Dnsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-drip-auth-46

Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> Thu, 01 February 2024 10:13 UTC

Return-Path: <jim@rfc1035.com>
X-Original-To: tm-rid@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tm-rid@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03C9EC14F5FD; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 02:13:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UsJdS9xica50; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 02:13:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shaun.rfc1035.com (smtp.v6.rfc1035.com [IPv6:2001:4b10:100:7::25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BB76C14F5FB; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 02:13:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (gromit.rfc1035.com [195.54.233.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shaun.rfc1035.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A3B002420E4A; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 10:13:17 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.200.91.1.1\))
From: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
In-Reply-To: <170676614829.19316.8910353000351670136@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2024 10:13:17 +0000
Cc: dnsdir@ietf.org, Di Ma via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-drip-auth.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, tm-rid@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8D83CB5B-4768-4219-9DC8-CA3064A90489@rfc1035.com>
References: <170676614829.19316.8910353000351670136@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Di Ma <madi@juicybun.cn>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.200.91.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tm-rid/qQjkYT984qQEQXhFMcjV-Awngbo>
Subject: Re: [Drip] [dnsdir] Dnsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-drip-auth-46
X-BeenThere: tm-rid@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Drone Remote Identification Protocol <tm-rid.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tm-rid>, <mailto:tm-rid-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tm-rid/>
List-Post: <mailto:tm-rid@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tm-rid-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tm-rid>, <mailto:tm-rid-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2024 10:13:27 -0000


> On 1 Feb 2024, at 05:42, Di Ma via Datatracker via dnsdir <dnsdir@ietf.org> wrote:
> I think this document is ready with clarification on DNS transport and security
> options in Section 3.1.

<dnsdir co-chair hat on>

Thanks Di!

<dnsdir co-chair hat off>

> Yet I still suggest adding RFC1035 as normative reference to the term 'DNS' in this document

<drip wg participant hat on>

Thanks for the suggestion. We have to agree to disagree here. A normative reference to RFC1035 is unhelpful IMO. There's lots of DNS stuff which isn’t in RFC1035 that (probably) will be used by DRIP: IPv6, EDNS0, TSIG, CERT RRs, DNSSEC, dynamic update, notify, ixfr, extended error reporting, etc, etc. I think it’s impractical and unnecessary to list them all. Or replace the RFC each time the next new DNS shiny to come along gets adopted in DRIP - DELEG records for example.

My concern about including a normative reference to RFC1035 is vendors/developers who would take that literally. ie Have DNS code which only supports RFC1035 *and nothing else*.

<drip wg participant hat off>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email