From peter@denic.de Sun May 1 14:33:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E7F3E06C2 for ; Sun, 1 May 2011 14:33:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.937 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.937 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.312, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YpEKNpuQ-qc9 for ; Sun, 1 May 2011 14:33:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from office.denic.de (gw-office.denic.de [81.91.160.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45E58E06AC for ; Sun, 1 May 2011 14:32:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from x27.adm.denic.de ([10.122.64.128]) by office.denic.de with esmtp id 1QGeFx-0003Lz-6x; Sun, 01 May 2011 23:32:45 +0200 Received: from localhost by x27.adm.denic.de with local id 1QGeFx-0007lj-2Z; Sun, 01 May 2011 23:32:45 +0200 Date: Sun, 1 May 2011 23:32:45 +0200 From: Peter Koch To: Andrew Sullivan Message-ID: <20110501213245.GX7554@x27.adm.denic.de> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan , Ralph Droms , int-ads@tools.ietf.org, ops-ads@tools.ietf.org, IETF Directorate DNS References: <45719338-C05C-432C-876D-7004032D0618@gmail.com> <20110427112942.GC7329@crankycanuck.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110427112942.GC7329@crankycanuck.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Sender: Peter Koch Cc: int-ads@tools.ietf.org, ops-ads@tools.ietf.org, IETF Directorate DNS Subject: Re: [dns-dir] draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-aaaa-whitelisting-implications-03 X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 May 2011 21:33:02 -0000 On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 07:29:42AM -0400, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 05:38:49PM -0400, Ralph Droms wrote: > > Has anyone from the DNS Directorate reviewed draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-aaaa-whitelisting-implications-03, which is on the agenda for this week's telechat? > > > > I had not, but I read it quickly just now and I have no objection. (I > do think it could use a pass with an aggressive red pen -- there are we had this document on the DNSOP agenda a while ago when the authors were looking for the right venue to progress it. It seemed pretty clear that it was more of a v6 than a DNS issue, but I had and still have my doubts that the IETF is the right organisation and that an RFC is the right publications means for this kind of text. It's not really clear whether it specifies the whitelisting mechanism to then criticize it in the first place. I believe the Cisco IPJ or the ISOC ISP column would be more appropriate for this kind of advocacy. For a technical document, the language is partly too sloppy and there's no clear separation between content and opinion. Therefore, I'd at least support Andrew's advise re: red pen review. It's good work looking for the wrong publisher. -Peter From rdroms.ietf@gmail.com Mon May 2 00:23:06 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98E2BE06D6 for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 00:23:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uklFo7NVE883 for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 00:22:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com (mail-ww0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28F3FE068B for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 00:22:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wwa36 with SMTP id 36so4061585wwa.13 for ; Mon, 02 May 2011 00:22:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to:x-mailer; bh=EjJlf+VkFqoAfgG5oQkG8mE+TkHkNvOAZP7sz/13TeI=; b=TJiQGlsUmna11NBbJaIr7OzaqPAjkExCNyswW4a4O2mr0E2iVa95k/kKb8tm9zzcvN 6Xo96Rx8R77uN5qmMQrReoZM1Btk+DY8VzPAuwm+Dqf9EFyk81I5Bb5231HUbm0WJp5T tjVRZ8WQdAsjznBAiO0BOj/C5PMMBBDftDSx0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=PU7Xi0cS+2f1xyOov4C1cTVjsadBhPT75pek68xxUI6KTlzKhDSy9jz4DoebaJ0lTM votZSOzm0pXPDNIrNSmCtC1gHVfguojHBjjyjYKJ6I2PxFvWH60IWEqtpwdtujJcf6pK 9wKkyZqOw/lyd4ZwSO0jYZRApQ/G1typL/B0A= Received: by 10.216.230.153 with SMTP id j25mr2181576weq.22.1304320975257; Mon, 02 May 2011 00:22:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [144.254.202.49] ([144.254.202.49]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id w12sm3196636wby.58.2011.05.02.00.22.53 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 02 May 2011 00:22:54 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ralph Droms In-Reply-To: <20110501213245.GX7554@x27.adm.denic.de> Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 09:22:54 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <45719338-C05C-432C-876D-7004032D0618@gmail.com> <20110427112942.GC7329@crankycanuck.ca> <20110501213245.GX7554@x27.adm.denic.de> To: Peter Koch X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Cc: int-ads@tools.ietf.org, ops-ads@tools.ietf.org, IETF Directorate DNS Subject: Re: [dns-dir] draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-aaaa-whitelisting-implications-03 X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 07:23:06 -0000 Have you all seen Dave Crocker's review of this doc? Comments? - Ralph On May 1, 2011, at 11:32 PM 5/1/11, Peter Koch wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 07:29:42AM -0400, Andrew Sullivan wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 05:38:49PM -0400, Ralph Droms wrote: >>> Has anyone from the DNS Directorate reviewed = draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-aaaa-whitelisting-implications-03, which is on the = agenda for this week's telechat? >>>=20 >>=20 >> I had not, but I read it quickly just now and I have no objection. = (I >> do think it could use a pass with an aggressive red pen -- there are >=20 > we had this document on the DNSOP agenda a while ago when the authors > were looking for the right venue to progress it. It seemed pretty = clear > that it was more of a v6 than a DNS issue, but I had and still have my = doubts > that the IETF is the right organisation and that an RFC is the right > publications means for this kind of text. >=20 > It's not really clear whether it specifies the whitelisting mechanism > to then criticize it in the first place. I believe the Cisco IPJ or > the ISOC ISP column would be more appropriate for this kind of > advocacy. For a technical document, the language is partly too > sloppy and there's no clear separation between content and opinion. > Therefore, I'd at least support Andrew's advise re: red pen review. > It's good work looking for the wrong publisher. >=20 > -Peter From ajs@shinkuro.com Mon May 2 04:07:11 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D273E06C9 for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 04:07:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.628 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.628 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.029, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6i5b9J3Doydm for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 04:07:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4959E06A6 for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 04:07:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shinkuro.com (69-196-144-230.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.144.230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BAD6B1ECB408; Mon, 2 May 2011 11:07:08 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 07:07:06 -0400 From: Andrew Sullivan To: Ralph Droms Message-ID: <20110502110706.GB12207@crankycanuck.ca> References: <45719338-C05C-432C-876D-7004032D0618@gmail.com> <20110427112942.GC7329@crankycanuck.ca> <20110501213245.GX7554@x27.adm.denic.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: int-ads@tools.ietf.org, Peter Koch , ops-ads@tools.ietf.org, IETF Directorate DNS Subject: Re: [dns-dir] draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-aaaa-whitelisting-implications-03 X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 11:07:11 -0000 On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 09:22:54AM +0200, Ralph Droms wrote: > Have you all seen Dave Crocker's review of this doc? Comments? For part of his review, I wasn't actually sure he'd read the same document I had. He appears not to have understood how the trick works, which at the very least does suggest that the draft needs another spin since it wasn't clear enough (I'm assuming that Dave did in fact read the document carefully enough to be reviewing it). I'm not sure where he got the idea that there's a special RR involved. His claim that the term "whitelisting" is being abused has some merit, I suppose, though I'm not sure what else one might call this tactic. A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@shinkuro.com Shinkuro, Inc. From narten@us.ibm.com Mon May 2 05:52:29 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEEFBE071C for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 05:52:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.501, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w5Bo7gYgiLUk for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 05:52:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com (e33.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.151]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C6B4E0694 for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 05:52:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.227]) by e33.co.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p42CjJej001207 for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 06:45:19 -0600 Received: from d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (d03av06.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.245]) by d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id p42CqGgi147316 for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 06:52:16 -0600 Received: from d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p42CvGJo003772 for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 06:57:17 -0600 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-65-193-26.mts.ibm.com [9.65.193.26]) by d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id p42CvFvf003712 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 2 May 2011 06:57:16 -0600 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.12.5) with ESMTP id p42Cq9gQ019498; Mon, 2 May 2011 08:52:13 -0400 Message-Id: <201105021252.p42Cq9gQ019498@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> To: Andrew Sullivan In-reply-to: <20110502110706.GB12207@crankycanuck.ca> References: <45719338-C05C-432C-876D-7004032D0618@gmail.com> <20110427112942.GC7329@crankycanuck.ca> <20110501213245.GX7554@x27.adm.denic.de> <20110502110706.GB12207@crankycanuck.ca> Comments: In-reply-to Andrew Sullivan message dated "Mon, 02 May 2011 07:07:06 -0400." Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 08:52:09 -0400 From: Thomas Narten Cc: int-ads@tools.ietf.org, Peter Koch , ops-ads@tools.ietf.org, IETF Directorate DNS Subject: Re: [dns-dir] draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-aaaa-whitelisting-implications-03 X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 12:52:29 -0000 The main problem with this document is that it has way too many words in it, and it isn't really balanced. It makes a number arguments, which it then extends to absurdity, to the point that I think it undermines the key underlying points themselves. It would really take a rewrite to make this document significantly better. But I doubt anyone has the energy to do this. Thomas From narten@us.ibm.com Wed May 4 05:24:36 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D8CCE0786 for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 05:24:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.875 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.875 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.124, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0fbdfIXo+1PL for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 05:24:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com (e34.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.152]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A34C5E0781 for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 05:24:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.227]) by e34.co.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p44CButp019132 for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 06:11:56 -0600 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (d03av01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.167]) by d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id p44CO1Te151092 for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 06:24:16 -0600 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p44CO1X8020717 for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 06:24:01 -0600 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-65-252-167.mts.ibm.com [9.65.252.167]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id p44CO0ri020659 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 4 May 2011 06:24:01 -0600 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.12.5) with ESMTP id p44CNtmr010890; Wed, 4 May 2011 08:23:59 -0400 Message-Id: <201105041223.p44CNtmr010890@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> To: IETF Directorate DNS Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 08:23:55 -0400 From: Thomas Narten Cc: int-ads@tools.ietf.org, ops-ads@tools.ietf.org Subject: [dns-dir] FWD: Re: [v6ops] Review of:draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-aaaa-whitelisting-implications-03 X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 12:24:36 -0000 For those not following v6ops, the two messages below are a pretty accurate assessment (IMO) of the document. I think it would be good to have a balanced document on whitelisting, but IMO, this document isn't it. But as always, once you have a document that is near the end stage, getting substantive revisions is really hard. The authors aren't really able to do so, and no one wants to step in and redo the document as a whole. Thomas ------- Forwarded Message From: Erik Kline To: "STARK, BARBARA H (ATTSI)" Cc: "Richard L. Barnes" , v6ops@ietf.org, Dave Crocker Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 00:26:08 +0900 Subject: Re: [v6ops] Review of:draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-aaaa-whitelisting-implications-03 There's a lot the draft doesn't discuss. Google is the only entity actively doing this right now, though Akamai has announced that they are doing it (auto-discovering what's safe to add to a whitelist), and both Facebook and Yahoo have expressed interest in doing this (Facebook has already begun whitelisting actually). AFAIK none of use have contributed substantially to this document, nor do I have the time to fix all the things that would need fixing (I'd just write a new doc and don't even have the time to do that). IMHO, this document is not a real discussion of whitelisting mechanics and motivations. It is, rather, a harangue against its use, despite the fact that it is, and may remain for some period (which we all do want to be as short as possible), an operational reality/necessity. _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops From: Lorenzo Colitti To: Erik Kline Cc: "Richard L. Barnes" , v6ops@ietf.org, Dave Crocker Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 18:35:51 +0200 Subject: Re: [v6ops] Review of:draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-aaaa-whitelisting-implications-03 On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Erik Kline wrote: > IMHO, this document is not a real discussion of whitelisting mechanics > and motivations. It is, rather, a harangue against its use, despite > the fact that it is, and may remain for some period (which we all do > want to be as short as possible), an operational reality/necessity. Right. For us (Google - but I think a lot of large website operators are in the same boat), whitelisting is the only possible option for IPv6 deployment, period. Subjecting hundreds of thousands of users to breakage is simply not an option, so while we don't particularly like the disadvantages of whitelisting, it's much, much better than doing nothing. We don't think that the draft is a balanced assessment of the situation, but at the same time, we don't have time to contribute to it, because we'd much rather be working on deployment, services, and operational concerns (e.g., 6to4 deprecation) rather than discussing something that for us is unavoidable. So we find ourselves in the situation that we don't really support the text but don't have time to influence it, and since we don't feel it's fair to simply attack the text without contributing, we're simply letting the document run its course. As Erik has noted, Google and Facebook are employing whitelisting, and Yahoo and Akamai have publicly announced their intention to do it. In a sense, it's just like DNS-based load-balancing. The vast majority of websites don't use it, but a lot of the very large ones do. Cheers, Lorenzo v6ops mailing list v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops ------- End of Forwarded Message From jari.arkko@piuha.net Wed May 4 05:30:49 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5801FE0786 for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 05:30:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.276 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.276 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.277, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QwzKVAF+lSWW for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 05:30:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9935DE0781 for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 05:30:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACF592D35A; Wed, 4 May 2011 15:30:47 +0300 (EEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MvX60nitAuQ9; Wed, 4 May 2011 15:30:44 +0300 (EEST) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B43A2CC49; Wed, 4 May 2011 15:30:43 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <4DC146F3.3080906@piuha.net> Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 14:30:43 +0200 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101027) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Thomas Narten References: <201105041223.p44CNtmr010890@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <201105041223.p44CNtmr010890@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: int-ads@tools.ietf.org, ops-ads@tools.ietf.org, IETF Directorate DNS Subject: Re: [dns-dir] FWD: Re: [v6ops] Review of:draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-aaaa-whitelisting-implications-03 X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 12:30:49 -0000 Thomas, > For those not following v6ops, the two messages below are a pretty > accurate assessment (IMO) of the document. I think it would be good to > have a balanced document on whitelisting, but IMO, this document isn't > it. But as always, once you have a document that is near the end > stage, getting substantive revisions is really hard. The authors > aren't really able to do so, and no one wants to step in and redo the > document as a whole. > Indeed. I know this document is not matching reality and it feels bad to publish an IETF RFC that IMO takes a very one sided view of this matter. That being said, a significant revision would take time, effort, and additional people. Don't know where these would come, and whether its worth it. (I'm guessing after World IPv6 Day there might be a bit more cycles available from the guys who are doing this kind of whitelisting, but not right now.) Jari From dromasca@avaya.com Thu May 5 23:48:20 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60D6FE0663; Thu, 5 May 2011 23:48:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.169 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.169 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.430, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T94ijUp8WuXm; Thu, 5 May 2011 23:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11050E0659; Thu, 5 May 2011 23:48:18 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAJuXw03GmAcF/2dsb2JhbACmQXepfQKbToYJBJQVihU X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,325,1301889600"; d="scan'208";a="278469411" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 06 May 2011 02:48:18 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,325,1301889600"; d="scan'208";a="617721267" Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.10]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 06 May 2011 02:48:17 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 08:48:13 +0200 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for the May 12, 2011 IESG Teleconference Thread-Index: AcwLd65iitHv4lDKTQeroG26M1FhZwAQPdKQ From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , , , , Subject: [dns-dir] FW: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for the May 12, 2011 IESG Teleconference X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 06:48:20 -0000 =20 Hi,=20 Please find below the preliminary agenda of the IESG telechat scheduled for 5/12. Please send me your comments, questions and concerns before 5/11 COB.=20 Thanks and Regards, Dan=20 2. Protocol Actions 2.1 WG Submissions 2.1.1 New Items o draft-ietf-sidr-roa-format-11 A Profile for Route Origin Authorizations (ROAs) (Proposed Standard) Note: Sandra Murphy (Sandra.Murphy@sparta.com) is the document shepherd. Token: Stewart Bryant o draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-06 Diameter S-NAPTR Usage (Proposed Standard) Note: Sebastien Decugis (sdecugis@freediameter.net) is the document shepherd. Token: Dan Romascanu o draft-ietf-idr-bgp-identifier-14 AS-wide Unique BGP Identifier for BGP-4 (Proposed Standard) Note: John Scudder (jgs@juniper.net) is the document shepherd. Token: Stewart Bryant 2.1.2 Returning Items NONE 2.2 Individual Submissions 2.2.1 New Items o draft-lear-iana-timezone-database-03 IANA Procedures for Maintaining the Timezone Database (BCP) Token: Peter Saint-Andre 2.2.2 Returning Items o draft-ietf-netlmm-pmipv6-mib-05 Proxy Mobile IPv6 Management Information Base (Proposed Standard) Note: Jonne Soininen (Jonne.Soininen@nsn.com) is the document shepherd. Token: Jari Arkko 3. Document Actions 3.1 WG Submissions 3.1.1 New Items o draft-ietf-ippm-tcp-throughput-tm-12 Framework for TCP Throughput Testing (Informational) Note: Document shepherd is Henk Uijterwaal (henk@ripe.net). Token: Wesley Eddy o draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-iana-rfced-extns-01 Datatracker Extensions to Include IANA and RFC Editor Processing Information (Informational) Token: Russ Housley 3.1.2 Returning Items NONE 3.2 Individual Submissions Via AD 3.2.1 New Items o draft-reed-urn-dgiwg-02 URN Namespace for the Defence Geospatial Information Working Group (DGIWG) (Informational) Token: Peter Saint-Andre 3.2.2 Returning Items NONE 3.3 IRTF and Independent Submission Stream Documents 3.3.1 New Items NONE 3.3.2 Returning Items NONE 4. Working Group Actions 4.1 WG Creation 4.1.1 Proposed for IETF Review NONE 4.1.2 Proposed for Approval o Protocol to Access WS database (paws) Token: Dan 4.2 WG Rechartering 4.2.1 Under Evaluation for IETF Review NONE 4.2.2 Proposed for Approval o Softwires (softwire) Token: Ralph From rdroms.ietf@gmail.com Wed May 11 04:46:39 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00AC2E06D7 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 04:46:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_INVITATION=-2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CyBSbNz3yIlI for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 04:46:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30D79E06D6 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 04:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vws12 with SMTP id 12so328982vws.31 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 04:46:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to:x-mailer; bh=+VUVgAKw4CLLOeNb9QtGJsTt1FDv8AG4HIVp55LtSuA=; b=EPxlEEFrWgZ5hmoLIxEme75ttWfHaI535psY1OoR4Eb48bnJdr2BcEWGqzTRJyLMWB QaF/Ebb6qk4ZjrWMK5r6LwWJY4PGGDQw7nNZkh2x5biHNdovtoP7VWNntwjXnV3KllCY 6p0fnNIE87AENgMvb+9PLlg/iJpzi7PW8Nud8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=CTt7THTGlshmuDO6W0AFAe4NKFTEOf3xotORmxAES/ogLjzR513S1XhxXDwFYjZ5xO on1/2B3zLzPzG6Af9gOT1ofMExlwAM/wBK4V//usbU6KV2S41+cglVlNZ3unLycRghHk 1HaK6GtJBbqhyNq/1KSTpROAemRaAfI6KTxwo= Received: by 10.220.169.143 with SMTP id z15mr588073vcy.10.1305114394065; Wed, 11 May 2011 04:46:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bxb-rdroms-8712.cisco.com (198-135-0-233.cisco.com [198.135.0.233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s33sm3655vcr.5.2011.05.11.04.46.31 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 11 May 2011 04:46:32 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ralph Droms In-Reply-To: <22d3l7forz.fsf@ziptop.autonomica.net> Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 07:46:29 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <6B05922A-B062-4F10-B876-BD4E19ADA6C0@gmail.com> References: <20110331083049.GO26225@x27.adm.denic.de> <22d3l7forz.fsf@ziptop.autonomica.net> To: IETF DNS Directorate X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Subject: Re: [dns-dir] Short preliminary summary DNS-DIR @IETF80 X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 11:46:39 -0000 Following up on an old thread... On Mar 31, 2011, at 8:38 AM 3/31/11, Lars-Johan Liman wrote: > pk@DENIC.DE: >> Dear DNS Directorate, >=20 > Thanks for these valuable notes, Peter! >=20 >> 1) early warning/dns radar >> The EW tool that scans I-Ds currently is suspended, there were = concerns >> re: the volume of messages >> Finding WGs that make use of or think of making use of the DNS as a >> building block currently works on an ad-hoc basis, either by DNS = Dir >> members attending WGs because of other duties, curiosity or >> occasionally by invitation of the relevant WG chairs or ADs. >> To improve this, we thought about recruiting "scouts" that would >> watch WGs to get back to the directorate or further review and >> response; to be continued >=20 > There are a few technologies that seem to be used in many places in = the > IETF. DNS is one of them, but there are a more (SNMP comes to mind) = but > not many. Would it be useful to try to put into the IETF WG framework = an > instruction to WG Chairs that "if any of your drafts/technologies = intend > to make use of any of technology XXXX, please notify this = corresponding > point of contact: YYYY", and produce a map with technologies and = contact > points. In the DNS case it could be "send a mail to DNSDIR". DHCP is in this category. There are still surprises when a draft using DHCP gets to the IESG with no dhc WG review. Perhaps a list of these technologies with appropriate actions and contacts should be added to = the proto shepherd writeup template. =20 >=20 >> 2) outreach >> The basic RFCs 1034/1035 are not covering enough of the DNS = environment >> to understand the interdependencies of protocol, operations, roles >> and governance issues that frame the boundaries within which = workable, >> scalable solutions may fit. There are overview documents, = including >> but not limited to, the more recent RFC 5507, 6055 and the current >> IAB I-D draft-iab-dns-applications-01.txt as well as the DNS = tutorial >> (IETF Sunday tutorial program), but for more outreach it might be = helpful >> to document more of the "unwritten rules" (to the extent they = exist, >> i.e., basic assumption). >=20 > Good idea. Much work to be done in this field! >=20 >> Other than that there are a couple of successful recent examples = where >> addressing DNS issues within the WGs (list and/or meeting) has = worked >> to get the direction right. There are also less successful = examples, >> where the problems were identified and communicated (this may or = may >> not include the suggestion of alternative approaches (to the = extent >> they exist). >=20 > Well, much of what falls under these "unwritten rules" is in the field > of operation, and while I strongly support more text in future RFCs = that > deal with the semantics of DNS, and operational requirements and > motivations thereof, it believe there is merit in producing = document(s) > that collect the current wisdom. This may serve as input to zone = owners > who are procuring service, and don't know what to look for. I could = even > envisage two versions: the quick overview "for dummies guide", and the > "gory detail" version for people to really want to learn and = understand. >=20 >> 3) advise to the ADs >> As a first step we agreed to compile a short list of WGs we >> attended with DNS on their agenda/roadmap to identify those that >> might need more (and probably hiher) attention. Please stay tuned. >=20 > This might also serve as a reminder to us all which groups we _should_ > attend, and where documents with DNS contenct are likely to appear. This list would be *very* useful. - Ralph >=20 >> PS: these are not minutes but my personal summary; contributions and >> further discussion welcome (always with the caveat that this list >> is publicly archived) >=20 > But even as such they are much valuable to a reader who didn't attend. >=20 > Cheers, > /Liman > _______________________________________________ > dns-dir mailing list > dns-dir@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-dir From rdroms.ietf@gmail.com Wed May 11 08:08:26 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B98DDE07CE for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 08:08:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bukQbRO4fY7k for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 08:08:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 202B6E076F for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 08:08:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vxg33 with SMTP id 33so500143vxg.31 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 08:08:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to:x-mailer; bh=hfjJNdBPZe8x9Lz9dYJ5o0cNR8cYImxR9Rn1XJURNVg=; b=XNlolGVU3WnWARuc0lK8b3S43kgVmevF44OLVFPFJU5mHhMxyDrr/nkHIM4Dye9jPB a/r1Q7oGPyznAILoaMni0dSDMjbbGH6VvzjFCiHQmJ9SgObqDbTAF6045X1TgEcIwJsg 8jKWCOToIQHpAqhXPUL8rW0vHi8Pv37WonuhA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=SFRSsReDtmjL5F5LgW7GD6QnAijfhf2eqFz8pyt8ZdC9aQ/hmr9D/sWsLVr+tr7fNx GdsTcR9lrTkv4od5nk0xkd7OCwPNHH11y+8madwwwZwtmZsy1yJRAIegzlBiiO0u2EM5 ThvmnZYEfLeuhkFXrQvRh6MAPuTpbdCmvqiHc= Received: by 10.52.77.6 with SMTP id o6mr2097188vdw.168.1305126505461; Wed, 11 May 2011 08:08:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [161.44.65.177] ([161.44.65.177]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h23sm67373vbz.9.2011.05.11.08.08.21 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 11 May 2011 08:08:23 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ralph Droms In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 11:08:20 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1A97E246-59CC-42FA-B4DE-642132FC6C17@gmail.com> References: <20110331083049.GO26225@x27.adm.denic.de><22d3l7forz.fsf@ziptop.autonomica.net> <6B05922A-B062-4F10-B876-BD4E19ADA6C0@gmail.com> To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Cc: IETF DNS Directorate Subject: Re: [dns-dir] Short preliminary summary DNS-DIR @IETF80 X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 15:08:26 -0000 On May 11, 2011, at 11:04 AM 5/11/11, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: >=20 >=20 >=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dns-dir-bounces@ietf.org=20 >> [mailto:dns-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Droms >=20 > .... >=20 >>> There are a few technologies that seem to be used in many places in=20= >>> the IETF. DNS is one of them, but there are a more (SNMP comes to=20 >>> mind) but not many. Would it be useful to try to put into=20 >> the IETF WG=20 >>> framework an instruction to WG Chairs that "if any of your=20 >>> drafts/technologies intend to make use of any of technology XXXX,=20 >>> please notify this corresponding point of contact: YYYY",=20 >> and produce=20 >>> a map with technologies and contact points. In the DNS case=20 >> it could be "send a mail to DNSDIR". >>=20 >> DHCP is in this category. There are still surprises when a=20 >> draft using DHCP gets to the IESG with no dhc WG review. =20 >> Perhaps a list of these technologies with appropriate actions=20 >> and contacts should be added to the proto shepherd writeup template. >>=20 >=20 > Hi,=20 >=20 > Actually (1.g) in the shepherd write-up includes the following:=20 >=20 > Has the document > met all formal review criteria it needs to, such as the MIB > Doctor, media type and URI type reviews? >=20 > This could be modified / expanded to cover other areas: DNS and DHCP > come to mind, but also XML-Dir, AAA and YANG doctors reviews.=20 >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Dan=20 Excellent point ... perhaps expanded into a short bullet list with = points-of-contact for each area? - Ralph >=20 From dromasca@avaya.com Wed May 11 08:50:12 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7DB1E0828 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 08:50:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KipctkbIJaZP for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 08:50:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com [135.11.29.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14F1AE0659 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 08:50:12 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjABAFynyk3GmAcF/2dsb2JhbACXWYM9inV3rQ0Cm2iGEASUNIN9hiI X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,353,1301889600"; d="scan'208";a="187868267" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 11 May 2011 11:13:30 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,353,1301889600"; d="scan'208";a="620201548" Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.10]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 11 May 2011 11:13:29 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 17:13:28 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1A97E246-59CC-42FA-B4DE-642132FC6C17@gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [dns-dir] Short preliminary summary DNS-DIR @IETF80 Thread-Index: AcwP7UfHtpWIzR7ESSujv4oJfXLPXQAABfmg References: <20110331083049.GO26225@x27.adm.denic.de><22d3l7forz.fsf@ziptop.autonomica.net> <6B05922A-B062-4F10-B876-BD4E19ADA6C0@gmail.com> <1A97E246-59CC-42FA-B4DE-642132FC6C17@gmail.com> From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "Ralph Droms" Cc: IETF DNS Directorate Subject: Re: [dns-dir] Short preliminary summary DNS-DIR @IETF80 X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 15:50:12 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Ralph Droms [mailto:rdroms.ietf@gmail.com]=20 > Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 6:08 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) > Cc: IETF DNS Directorate > Subject: Re: [dns-dir] Short preliminary summary DNS-DIR @IETF80 >=20 >=20 > On May 11, 2011, at 11:04 AM 5/11/11, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: dns-dir-bounces@ietf.org > >> [mailto:dns-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Droms > >=20 > > .... > >=20 > >>> There are a few technologies that seem to be used in many=20 > places in=20 > >>> the IETF. DNS is one of them, but there are a more (SNMP comes to > >>> mind) but not many. Would it be useful to try to put into > >> the IETF WG > >>> framework an instruction to WG Chairs that "if any of your=20 > >>> drafts/technologies intend to make use of any of technology XXXX,=20 > >>> please notify this corresponding point of contact: YYYY", > >> and produce > >>> a map with technologies and contact points. In the DNS case > >> it could be "send a mail to DNSDIR". > >>=20 > >> DHCP is in this category. There are still surprises when a draft=20 > >> using DHCP gets to the IESG with no dhc WG review. > >> Perhaps a list of these technologies with appropriate actions and=20 > >> contacts should be added to the proto shepherd writeup template. > >>=20 > >=20 > > Hi, > >=20 > > Actually (1.g) in the shepherd write-up includes the following:=20 > >=20 > > Has the document > > met all formal review criteria it needs to, such as the MIB > > Doctor, media type and URI type reviews? > >=20 > > This could be modified / expanded to cover other areas: DNS=20 > and DHCP=20 > > come to mind, but also XML-Dir, AAA and YANG doctors reviews. > >=20 > > Regards, > >=20 > > Dan >=20 > Excellent point ... perhaps expanded into a short bullet list=20 > with points-of-contact for each area? ... adresses of the directorates / review teams Should we draft such a list and put the proposal on the informal IESG telechat agenda?=20 Dan >=20 > - Ralph >=20 > >=20 >=20 >=20 From dromasca@avaya.com Wed May 11 09:31:31 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EEEFE0832 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:31:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.849 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.250, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z2lqsUSuFbcV for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:31:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com [135.11.29.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC1E3E0679 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:31:30 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAAulyk3GmAcF/2dsb2JhbACmB3eIcKQEAptnhhAElDSKHw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,353,1301889600"; d="scan'208";a="187866733" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 11 May 2011 11:04:54 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,353,1301889600"; d="scan'208";a="620196287" Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.10]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 11 May 2011 11:04:53 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 17:04:52 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <6B05922A-B062-4F10-B876-BD4E19ADA6C0@gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [dns-dir] Short preliminary summary DNS-DIR @IETF80 Thread-Index: AcwP0RoCU8QXNk7MQLmW0B8SIn4SQgAG0LgA References: <20110331083049.GO26225@x27.adm.denic.de><22d3l7forz.fsf@ziptop.autonomica.net> <6B05922A-B062-4F10-B876-BD4E19ADA6C0@gmail.com> From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "Ralph Droms" , "IETF DNS Directorate" Subject: Re: [dns-dir] Short preliminary summary DNS-DIR @IETF80 X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 16:31:31 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: dns-dir-bounces@ietf.org=20 > [mailto:dns-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Droms .... > > There are a few technologies that seem to be used in many places in=20 > > the IETF. DNS is one of them, but there are a more (SNMP comes to=20 > > mind) but not many. Would it be useful to try to put into=20 > the IETF WG=20 > > framework an instruction to WG Chairs that "if any of your=20 > > drafts/technologies intend to make use of any of technology XXXX,=20 > > please notify this corresponding point of contact: YYYY",=20 > and produce=20 > > a map with technologies and contact points. In the DNS case=20 > it could be "send a mail to DNSDIR". >=20 > DHCP is in this category. There are still surprises when a=20 > draft using DHCP gets to the IESG with no dhc WG review. =20 > Perhaps a list of these technologies with appropriate actions=20 > and contacts should be added to the proto shepherd writeup template. > =20 Hi,=20 Actually (1.g) in the shepherd write-up includes the following:=20 Has the document met all formal review criteria it needs to, such as the MIB Doctor, media type and URI type reviews? This could be modified / expanded to cover other areas: DNS and DHCP come to mind, but also XML-Dir, AAA and YANG doctors reviews.=20 Regards, Dan=20 =20 From rdroms.ietf@gmail.com Wed May 11 16:51:52 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 108F8E08F5; Wed, 11 May 2011 16:51:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JD6wk08BPwwO; Wed, 11 May 2011 16:51:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89F6EE08E5; Wed, 11 May 2011 16:51:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Ralph Droms To: The IESG X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.54 Message-ID: <20110511235151.30323.53528.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 16:51:51 -0700 Cc: sdecugis@freediameter.net, dns-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr@tools.ietf.org, dime-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: [dns-dir] Ralph Droms' Discuss on draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: (with DISCUSS) X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 23:51:52 -0000 Ralph Droms has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Has this document been reviewed by the DNS Directorate or other external DN= S experts? From dromasca@avaya.com Thu May 12 02:04:46 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AE8AE0669; Thu, 12 May 2011 02:04:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.349 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.250, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PepL1qxC1Yal; Thu, 12 May 2011 02:04:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42D21E074A; Thu, 12 May 2011 02:04:42 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AuwAADehy03GmAcF/2dsb2JhbACXPY40d64CAptlhhMElDqKJA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,357,1301889600"; d="scan'208";a="246112678" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 12 May 2011 05:04:40 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,357,1301889600"; d="scan'208";a="620589701" Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.10]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 12 May 2011 05:04:38 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 11:04:35 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20110511235151.30323.53528.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Ralph Droms' Discuss on draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: (withDISCUSS) Thread-Index: AcwQNmlIIaj0g7iMRmKEEydcpcagdAATORSA References: <20110511235151.30323.53528.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "Ralph Droms" , "The IESG" Cc: sdecugis@freediameter.net, Mark Jones , dns-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr@tools.ietf.org, dime-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [dns-dir] Ralph Droms' Discuss on draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: (withDISCUSS) X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 09:04:46 -0000 Can somebody from the DNS Directorate answer the question asked by Ralph? I do not recall any review, but I may have missed it. =20 Thanks and Regards, Dan=20 =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: iesg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces@ietf.org] On=20 > Behalf Of Ralph Droms > Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 2:52 AM > To: The IESG > Cc: sdecugis@freediameter.net; dns-dir@ietf.org;=20 > draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr@tools.ietf.org;=20 > dime-chairs@tools.ietf.org > Subject: Ralph Droms' Discuss on=20 > draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: (withDISCUSS) >=20 > Ralph Droms has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: Discuss >=20 > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and=20 > reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines.=20 > (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) >=20 > Please refer to=20 > http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >=20 >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > Has this document been reviewed by the DNS Directorate or=20 > other external DNS experts? >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 From paf@cisco.com Thu May 12 06:38:16 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10315E0784; Thu, 12 May 2011 06:38:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3spWvtHtL-zD; Thu, 12 May 2011 06:38:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-2.cisco.com (ams-iport-2.cisco.com [144.254.224.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BE24E0798; Thu, 12 May 2011 06:38:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=paf@cisco.com; l=2409; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1305207491; x=1306417091; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=v2cldV9Ykm4hfbkTlwIoaUVZZRQNcE2aLhqZDKe1tWI=; b=G5Pq/zoMw+MhiVdwzb9PoeZh8rII+mCoNR4PLeIvil1Hw7M29Ys8kH4a sYEplttza/7bWS9CUfjE5rgAmM6Julp+y9s7Cp5jdBaJt8QQCTUciyMe2 blJmvwNzsH5aV0lRLxTF/XMjNH4JN97IUDSTMDJ6mK4xa/+wuMlK6YmfH c=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Au4AAGrhy02Q/khLgWdsb2JhbACXP441FAEBFiYliHCgVp40hhUEj3uOaw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,358,1301875200"; d="scan'208";a="29924317" Received: from ams-core-2.cisco.com ([144.254.72.75]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 May 2011 13:38:10 +0000 Received: from dhcp-10-55-81-242.cisco.com (dhcp-10-55-81-242.cisco.com [10.55.81.242]) by ams-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p4CDc9Wj007696; Thu, 12 May 2011 13:38:10 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 15:38:09 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20110511235151.30323.53528.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: Mark Jones , draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr@tools.ietf.org, sdecugis@freediameter.net, dime-chairs@tools.ietf.org, dns-dir@ietf.org, The IESG Subject: Re: [dns-dir] Ralph Droms' Discuss on draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: (withDISCUSS) X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 13:38:16 -0000 I have checked the document, and think it is fine. That said, I also am a person that like examples, and the document = doesn't have anything like that. I do not know diameter enough to say whether the RRSET will be huge, as = I do not understand how many NAPTR RR one normally will have with the = high number of options. If the number of options is high (and because of that the RRSET large) I = think using URI RR Type with the aaa options as prefixes to the domain = name is a better design choice -- but that is from a pure DNS = perspective... Patrik F=E4ltstr=F6m Distinguished Consulting Engineer Office of the CTO For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html On 12 maj 2011, at 11.04, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: >=20 >=20 > Can somebody from the DNS Directorate answer the question asked by > Ralph? I do not recall any review, but I may have missed it. =20 >=20 >=20 > Thanks and Regards, >=20 > Dan=20 >=20 >=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: iesg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces@ietf.org] On=20 >> Behalf Of Ralph Droms >> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 2:52 AM >> To: The IESG >> Cc: sdecugis@freediameter.net; dns-dir@ietf.org;=20 >> draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr@tools.ietf.org;=20 >> dime-chairs@tools.ietf.org >> Subject: Ralph Droms' Discuss on=20 >> draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: (withDISCUSS) >>=20 >> Ralph Droms has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: Discuss >>=20 >> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and=20 >> reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines.=20 >> (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) >>=20 >> Please refer to=20 >> http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> DISCUSS: >> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>=20 >> Has this document been reviewed by the DNS Directorate or=20 >> other external DNS experts? >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 > _______________________________________________ > dns-dir mailing list > dns-dir@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-dir From rdroms.ietf@gmail.com Thu May 12 06:43:56 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38D7EE0694; Thu, 12 May 2011 06:43:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ie+nQkuu601Y; Thu, 12 May 2011 06:43:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B3C0E0798; Thu, 12 May 2011 06:43:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vws12 with SMTP id 12so1342831vws.31 for ; Thu, 12 May 2011 06:43:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to:x-mailer; bh=o5WFRROIwboHUgq2Rl7XEidum7ICOEwFORnIBX58Tu8=; b=FbmW2RnyX3kaQqAUrjKh9eOMoAHN3EyCjMyWgbBlypdbnRXQdJ2vYeVXsJquR8bDXL Ap1BWttU0iQ7FmzaP5cNbE2oEHGJuHJ+/4q8DLGqm9b49u3ycQaJWeUa1mHgTpz6uU4T rW+PkV7cjq6crEuXZ1n174hsghck76pZbHUwY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=hTFxsvlC+zFduq7FixhsJggCDZciuHiQ7wrgP718FGfHSOzJ1iYZmIqZQPRbi3xJra PwsmkEhvUuzbRvc8FkSb/20ZMro8pHdeSWHlcF55GGuBTHVUPwNS29r+Jg486TEFdWJT mF/v8HWPxTWuxNgFj+oigEv0PL8BqiEq3S9tg= Received: by 10.52.18.74 with SMTP id u10mr305071vdd.192.1305207830780; Thu, 12 May 2011 06:43:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [161.44.65.177] ([161.44.65.177]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 15sm142857vdh.27.2011.05.12.06.43.46 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 12 May 2011 06:43:48 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Ralph Droms In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 09:43:45 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <50B3DC2A-1383-4F89-9726-AB87D7A91C87@gmail.com> References: <20110511235151.30323.53528.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Cc: draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr@tools.ietf.org, Mark Jones , sdecugis@freediameter.net, dime-chairs@tools.ietf.org, dns-dir@ietf.org, The IESG Subject: Re: [dns-dir] Ralph Droms' Discuss on draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: (withDISCUSS) X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 13:43:56 -0000 Thanks, Patrik. Unless you object, I'll enter your review as a Comment = and clear my Discuss. - Ralph On May 12, 2011, at 9:38 AM 5/12/11, Patrik F=E4ltstr=F6m wrote: > I have checked the document, and think it is fine. >=20 > That said, I also am a person that like examples, and the document = doesn't have anything like that. >=20 > I do not know diameter enough to say whether the RRSET will be huge, = as I do not understand how many NAPTR RR one normally will have with the = high number of options. >=20 > If the number of options is high (and because of that the RRSET large) = I think using URI RR Type with the aaa options as prefixes to the domain = name is a better design choice -- but that is from a pure DNS = perspective... >=20 > Patrik F=E4ltstr=F6m > Distinguished Consulting Engineer > Office of the CTO >=20 > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html >=20 >=20 > On 12 maj 2011, at 11.04, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: >=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> Can somebody from the DNS Directorate answer the question asked by >> Ralph? I do not recall any review, but I may have missed it. =20 >>=20 >>=20 >> Thanks and Regards, >>=20 >> Dan=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: iesg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces@ietf.org] On=20 >>> Behalf Of Ralph Droms >>> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 2:52 AM >>> To: The IESG >>> Cc: sdecugis@freediameter.net; dns-dir@ietf.org;=20 >>> draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr@tools.ietf.org;=20 >>> dime-chairs@tools.ietf.org >>> Subject: Ralph Droms' Discuss on=20 >>> draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: (withDISCUSS) >>>=20 >>> Ralph Droms has entered the following ballot position for >>> draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: Discuss >>>=20 >>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and=20 >>> reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines.=20 >>> (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) >>>=20 >>> Please refer to=20 >>> http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> DISCUSS: >>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>=20 >>> Has this document been reviewed by the DNS Directorate or=20 >>> other external DNS experts? >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> dns-dir mailing list >> dns-dir@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-dir >=20 From paf@cisco.com Thu May 12 07:03:27 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B71E6E07D2; Thu, 12 May 2011 07:03:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4QirpavYsG00; Thu, 12 May 2011 07:03:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D839CE07A9; Thu, 12 May 2011 07:03:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=paf@cisco.com; l=3049; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1305209003; x=1306418603; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=/4wX71W2Gt3b1eEal5AAh3KLes+cUTX7lTnZPAvI2PE=; b=KQiPqCjtjB3H0by+412+BqFuNKQDcS+Vov3ayv8mDkVdpUYkR1TeuamJ 6ZVt0w2Asw0v6udam73FOZpFSHaJjFYooii8sGrK98P1IBB2Elt775C1o 9lJEWfvmMTOig60+YWAEyIcHosnWwufcF473Rkwe2jloJz1KH5w0NZBhU w=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Au4AALzny02Q/khMgWdsb2JhbACXP441FAEBFiYliHCgWp4whhUEj3uOaw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,358,1301875200"; d="scan'208";a="88172117" Received: from ams-core-3.cisco.com ([144.254.72.76]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 May 2011 14:03:21 +0000 Received: from dhcp-10-55-81-242.cisco.com (dhcp-10-55-81-242.cisco.com [10.55.81.242]) by ams-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p4CE3LaL028146; Thu, 12 May 2011 14:03:21 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= In-Reply-To: <50B3DC2A-1383-4F89-9726-AB87D7A91C87@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 16:03:21 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20110511235151.30323.53528.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <50B3DC2A-1383-4F89-9726-AB87D7A91C87@gmail.com> To: Ralph Droms X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: Mark Jones , draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr@tools.ietf.org, sdecugis@freediameter.net, The IESG , dns-dir@ietf.org, dime-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [dns-dir] Ralph Droms' Discuss on draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: (withDISCUSS) X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 14:03:27 -0000 That is fine. Patrik F=E4ltstr=F6m Distinguished Consulting Engineer Office of the CTO For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html On 12 maj 2011, at 15.43, Ralph Droms wrote: > Thanks, Patrik. Unless you object, I'll enter your review as a = Comment and clear my Discuss. >=20 > - Ralph >=20 > On May 12, 2011, at 9:38 AM 5/12/11, Patrik F=E4ltstr=F6m wrote: >=20 >> I have checked the document, and think it is fine. >>=20 >> That said, I also am a person that like examples, and the document = doesn't have anything like that. >>=20 >> I do not know diameter enough to say whether the RRSET will be huge, = as I do not understand how many NAPTR RR one normally will have with the = high number of options. >>=20 >> If the number of options is high (and because of that the RRSET = large) I think using URI RR Type with the aaa options as prefixes to the = domain name is a better design choice -- but that is from a pure DNS = perspective... >>=20 >> Patrik F=E4ltstr=F6m >> Distinguished Consulting Engineer >> Office of the CTO >>=20 >> For corporate legal information go to: >> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html >>=20 >>=20 >> On 12 maj 2011, at 11.04, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: >>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Can somebody from the DNS Directorate answer the question asked by >>> Ralph? I do not recall any review, but I may have missed it. =20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Thanks and Regards, >>>=20 >>> Dan=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: iesg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces@ietf.org] On=20 >>>> Behalf Of Ralph Droms >>>> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 2:52 AM >>>> To: The IESG >>>> Cc: sdecugis@freediameter.net; dns-dir@ietf.org;=20 >>>> draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr@tools.ietf.org;=20 >>>> dime-chairs@tools.ietf.org >>>> Subject: Ralph Droms' Discuss on=20 >>>> draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: (withDISCUSS) >>>>=20 >>>> Ralph Droms has entered the following ballot position for >>>> draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-08: Discuss >>>>=20 >>>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and=20 >>>> reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines.=20 >>>> (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) >>>>=20 >>>> Please refer to=20 >>>> http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >>>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> DISCUSS: >>>> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>=20 >>>> Has this document been reviewed by the DNS Directorate or=20 >>>> other external DNS experts? >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> dns-dir mailing list >>> dns-dir@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-dir >>=20 >=20 From dromasca@avaya.com Fri May 20 02:02:54 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DF94E070A; Fri, 20 May 2011 02:02:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.878 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.878 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.279, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5XMOwVMpaQf7; Fri, 20 May 2011 02:02:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com [135.11.29.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72876E06BA; Fri, 20 May 2011 02:02:53 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ArkGADUt1k2HCzI1/2dsb2JhbACbHYp9d6lQAptNhhkElF2Df4Ys X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,241,1304308800"; d="scan'208";a="189265472" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 20 May 2011 05:02:52 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,241,1304308800"; d="scan'208";a="654238895" Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.10]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 20 May 2011 05:02:51 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 11:02:49 +0200 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for the May 26, 2011 IESG Teleconference Thread-Index: AcwWb2XJnvjhMdqUSXqXqBJ9VljLTQAXPkaA From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , , , , Subject: [dns-dir] FW: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for the May 26, 2011 IESG Teleconference X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 09:02:54 -0000 =20 Hi,=20 Please see below the preliminary agenda of the 5/26 IESG telechat. Please send me your questions, comments and concerns about the documents and WG charters brought up for approval before 5/25 COB. Thanks and Regards, Dan=20 2. Protocol Actions 2.1 WG Submissions 2.1.1 New Items o draft-ietf-xcon-common-data-model-27 Conference Information Data Model for Centralized Conferencing (XCON) (Proposed Standard) Note: Alan Johnston (alan.b.johnston@gmail.com) is the Document Shepherd Token: Robert Sparks o draft-ietf-vcarddav-vcardrev-19 vCard Format Specification (Proposed Standard) Note: The document shepherd is Alexey Melnikov. Token: Peter Saint-Andre o draft-ietf-vcarddav-vcardxml-09 vCard XML Representation (Proposed Standard) Note: The document shepherd is Alexey Melnikov. Token: Peter Saint-Andre o draft-ietf-xcon-ccmp-13 Centralized Conferencing Manipulation Protocol (Proposed Standard) Note: Alan Johnston (alan.b.johnston@gmail.com) is the Document Shepherd. Token: Robert Sparks o draft-ietf-avtext-multicast-acq-rtcp-xr-04 Multicast Acquisition Report Block Type for RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Reports (XRs) (Proposed Standard) Note: Keith Drage (keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com) is the document shepherd. Token: Gonzalo Camarillo o draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-options-registry-02 IANA Registry for Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) Options (Proposed Standard) Note: Flemming Andreasen (fandreas@cisco.com) is the document shepherd. Token: Gonzalo Camarillo o draft-ietf-savi-fcfs-09 FCFS SAVI: First-Come First-Serve Source-Address Validation for Locally Assigned IPv6 Addresses (Proposed Standard) Note: Jean-Michel Combes (jeanmichel.combes@gmail.com) is the Document Shepherd Token: Jari Arkko o rfc5590 Transport Subsystem for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) (Draft) Token: Sean Turner o rfc5591 Transport Security Model for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) (Draft) Token: Sean Turner o rfc5953 Transport Layer Security (TLS) Transport Model for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) (Draft) Token: Sean Turner o rfc5343 Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) Context EngineID Discovery (Draft) Token: Dan Romascanu 2.1.2 Returning Items NONE 2.2 Individual Submissions 2.2.1 New Items o draft-daboo-et-al-icalendar-in-xml-09 xCal: The XML format for iCalendar (Proposed Standard) Token: Peter Saint-Andre o draft-josefsson-gss-capsulate-05 Context Token Encapsulate/Decapsulate and OID Comparison Functions for the Generic Security Service Application Program Interface (GSS-API) (Proposed Standard) Note: Alexey Melnikov (alexey.melnikov@isode.com) is the document shepherd. Token: Stephen Farrell 2.2.2 Returning Items NONE 3. Document Actions 3.1 WG Submissions 3.1.1 New Items o draft-ietf-xcon-examples-08 Centralized Conferencing Manipulation Protocol (CCMP) Call Flow Examples (Informational) Note: Alan Johnston (alan.b.johnston@gmail.com) is the Document Shepherd Token: Robert Sparks o draft-ietf-siprec-req-10 Use Cases and Requirements for SIP-based Media Recording (SIPREC) (Informational) Note: John Elwell (john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com) is the document shepherd. Token: Gonzalo Camarillo o draft-ietf-grow-geomrt-01 MRT BGP routing information export format with geo-location extensions (Informational) Note: Christopher Morrow (christopher.morrow@gmail.com) is the document shepherd. Token: Ron Bonica o draft-ietf-savi-threat-scope-05 SAVI Threat Scope (Informational) Note: Jean-Michel Combes (jeanmichel.combes@gmail.com) is the Document Shepherd. Token: Jari Arkko o draft-ietf-tcpm-persist-04 Clarification of sender behavior in persist condition. (Informational) Note: Michael Scharf (michael.scharf@alcatel-lucent.com) is the document shepherd. Token: Wesley Eddy 3.1.2 Returning Items NONE 3.2 Individual Submissions Via AD 3.2.1 New Items o draft-giralt-schac-ns-05 Definition of a Uniform Resource Name (URN) Namespace for the Schema for Academia (SCHAC) (Informational) Token: Peter Saint-Andre 3.2.2 Returning Items o draft-haleplidis-forces-implementation-experience-02 ForCES Implementation Experience Draft (Informational) Note: AD Sponosred Submission for publication as an Informational RFC Token: Adrian Farrel 3.3 IRTF and Independent Submission Stream Documents 3.3.1 New Items NONE 3.3.2 Returning Items NONE 4. Working Group Actions 4.1 WG Creation 4.1.1 Proposed for IETF Review o Open Authentication Protocol (oauth) Token: Stephen Farrell o IPv6 Site Renumbering (6renum) Token: Ron Bonica 4.1.2 Proposed for Approval o Protocol to Access WS database (paws) Token: Peter Saint-Andre 4.2 WG Rechartering 4.2.1 Under Evaluation for IETF Review o Transport Layer Security (tls) Token: Sean Turner o Transport Area Working Group (tsvwg) Token: David Harrington 4.2.2 Proposed for Approval o Softwires (softwire) Token: Ralph Droms