Subject: [dnsext] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2672bis-dname-15.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 05:15:01 -0800 (PST)

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the DNS Extensions Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : Update to DNAME Redirection in the DNS
	Author(s)       : S. Rose, W. Wijngaards
	Filename        : draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2672bis-dname-15.txt
	Pages           : 18
	Date            : 2009-03-06

The DNAME record provides redirection for a sub-tree of the domain
name tree in the DNS system.  That is, all names that end with a
particular suffix are redirected to another part of the DNS.  This is
a revision of the original specification in RFC 2672, also aligning
RFC 3363 and RFC 4294 with this revision.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2672bis-dname-15.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 11:18:48 -0500

> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2672bis-dname-15.txt

Dear colleagues,

This version is an attempt to address the issues that cropped up
during the WGLC some time ago.  My apologies for having taken so long
to process the comments and see whether the editors (who did the work
promptly) have addressed them.  In my opinion, Scott and Wouter have
addressed the issues raised during last call.  If you raised issues,
please check to make sure that you agree this document addresses them.

Best regards,

Andrew

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]
Shinkuro, Inc.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

---

From: ap <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 18:41:42 +0100

Hi everyone,

apologies if one of these points is discussed already. I've checked the
archive and didn't found any hint.

> Rose & Wijngaards       Expires September 7, 2009             [Page 5]
> 
> Internet-Draft              DNAME Redirection               March 2009
>
>
>  In the table below, the QNAME refers to the query name.  The owner is
>  the DNAME owner domain name, and the target refers to the target of
>  the DNAME record.  The result is the resulting name after performing
>   the DNAME substitution on the query name. "no match" means that the
>   query did not match the DNAME and thus no substitution is performed
>   and a possible error message is returned (if no other result is
>   possible).  In the examples below, 'cyc' and 'shortloop' contain
>   loops.
>
>    QNAME            owner  DNAME   target         result
>    ---------------- -------------- -------------- -----------------
>    com.             example.com.   example.net.   <no match>
>    example.com.     example.com.   example.net.   <no match>
>    a.example.com.   example.com.   example.net.   a.example.net.
>    a.b.example.com. example.com.   example.net.   a.b.example.net.
>    ab.example.com.  b.example.com. example.net.   <no match>
>    foo.example.com. example.com.   example.net.   foo.example.net.
>    a.x.example.com. x.example.com. example.net.   a.example.net.
>    a.example.com.   example.com.   y.example.net. a.y.example.net.
>    cyc.example.com. example.com.   example.com.   cyc.example.com.
>    cyc.example.com. example.com.   c.example.com. cyc.c.example.com.

It's obvious these are the results after the 1st step of iteration.

But for a common nameserver administrator (me) the
reassessed domainname / DNS-answer after processing
DNAME substitution would be of interest.

As long as DNAME chains are allowed, the last two lines
above will result in an error due to infinite DNAME looping.
And as you wrote in 2.4. a RR for
c.example.com/cyc.example.com./cyc.c.example.com.
MUST NOT exist. This is a second point why these queries
result to an error/no name error/no data error whatsoever.

On the other hand

>    shortloop.x.x.   x.             .              shortloop.x.
>    shortloop.x.     x.             .              shortloop.

will give shortloop. both.

Just a proposal for a footnote to this example.

In 2.4 I've missed a hint like:

DNAME Records pointing to itself or down to a subdomain
are logical MUST NOT use cases and should be checked at
zone loading time.

5.1 does not match too.

If this sentence in 2.3
>   DNAME RRs are not allowed at the parent side of a delegation point
>   but are allowed at a zone apex.
address' my point, then I guess it is not stressed strictly enough.

Andreas

>
>                   Table 1. DNAME Substitution Examples.
>