From ogud@ogud.com Fri Dec 2 13:39:31 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C06481F0C61 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:39:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AOFeR9qfWHJ5 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:39:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from stora.ogud.com (stora.ogud.com [66.92.146.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E28721F0C4C for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:39:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (nyttbox.md.ogud.com [10.20.30.4]) by stora.ogud.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pB2LdSMJ099582 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 16:39:29 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from ogud@ogud.com) Message-ID: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 16:39:28 -0500 From: Olafur Gudmundsson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dnsext@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 10.20.30.4 Subject: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 21:39:31 -0000 Dear colleagues, The chairs have been asked by the AD's to prepare the working group for closing early next year. Before the working group closes we need to complete the drafts that are on our charter. Here is the list of current open milestones: Apr 2011 RFC3597-bis Unknown RR advanced to IESG for PS Jun 2011 EDNS0-bis update advanced to IESG Aug 2011 Algorithm signaling document to IESG Oct 2011 DNSSEC Errata document to IESG Nov 2011 Decision about new protocol elements, if any Nov 2011 Requirements and current state survey document to IESG for publication Dec 2011 IXFR-only to IESG As you can see we are far behind schedule thus we propose the following milestones Dec 2011 DNSSEC-errata document to IESG Jan 2012 RFC3597-bis To IESG for standard Jan 2012 EDNS0-bis update to IESG Feb 2012 IXFR-Only to IESG Feb 2012 Algorithm signaling document to IESG Mar 2012 Close down Working group Note that this removes the aliasing work from the work plan. The draft is currently expired, and there was not general agreement about whether to wait on input from the current ICANN work on variants at the TLD (but apparently we did wait). Since ICANN's project is not scheduled to complete before February of 2012, we can't realistically expect to complete a requirements document before March. So we are planning not to complete that work item. It is not clear whether a WG that is closing with unfinished business needs to recharter as a formal step; we're looking into that, and will return with an answer. Best regards, Olafur and Andrew From ajs@anvilwalrusden.com Fri Dec 2 13:42:12 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 864521F0C6D for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:42:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.469 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.469 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.130, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WRQSA5yOeldQ for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:42:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21B8C1F0C4C for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:42:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from shinkuro.com (69-196-144-227.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.144.227]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2E4271ECB41F; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 21:41:51 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 16:42:05 -0500 From: Andrew Sullivan To: dnsext@ietf.org Message-ID: <20111202214204.GY61329@shinkuro.com> References: <4EC4D950.2020501@ogud.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4EC4D950.2020501@ogud.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: dnsext-ads@tools.ietf.org, dnsext-chairs chairs Subject: [dnsext] Plan to wrap up the Working Group X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 21:42:12 -0000 Dear colleagues, The chairs have been asked by the AD's to prepare the working group for closing early next year. Before the working group closes we need to complete the drafts that are on our charter. Here is the list of current open milestones: Apr 2011 RFC3597-bis Unknown RR advanced to IESG for PS Jun 2011 EDNS0-bis update advanced to IESG Aug 2011 Algorithm signaling document to IESG Oct 2011 DNSSEC Errata document to IESG Nov 2011 Decision about new protocol elements, if any Nov 2011 Requirements and current state survey document to IESG for publication Dec 2011 IXFR-only to IESG As you can see we are far behind schedule thus we propose the following milestones Dec 2011 DNSSEC-errata document to IESG Jan 2012 RFC3597-bis To IESG for standard Jan 2012 EDNS0-bis update to IESG Feb 2012 IXFR-Only to IESG Feb 2012 Algorithm signaling document to IESG Mar 2012 Close down Working group Note that this removes the aliasing work from the work plan. The draft is currently expired, and there was not general agreement about whether to wait on input from the current ICANN work on variants at the TLD (but apparently we did wait). Since ICANN's project is not scheduled to complete before February of 2012, we can't realistically expect to complete a requirements document before March. So we are planning not to complete that work item. It is not clear whether a WG that is closing with unfinished business needs to recharter as a formal step, but our AD hasn't suggested that we need to. Best regards, Olafur and Andrew -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com From dougb@dougbarton.us Fri Dec 2 14:43:50 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA17B11E812A for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 14:43:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O4QdYTSbXk4g for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 14:43:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx22.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.5]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 360A111E809A for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 14:43:50 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 2390 invoked by uid 399); 2 Dec 2011 22:43:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO 172-17-198-245.globalsuite.net) (dougb@dougbarton.us@12.207.105.210) by mail2.fluidhosting.com with ESMTPAM; 2 Dec 2011 22:43:47 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 12.207.105.210 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Message-ID: <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 14:43:46 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111110 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olafur Gudmundsson References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> In-Reply-To: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> X-Enigmail-Version: undefined OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 22:43:51 -0000 On 12/02/2011 13:39, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote: > The chairs have been asked by the AD's to prepare the working group > for closing early next year. Suppressing my initial (not family-friendly) response, can I simply ask, "Why?" -- "We could put the whole Internet into a book." "Too practical." Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/ From healthyao@gmail.com Sat Dec 3 05:09:56 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BFE121F8F57 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 05:09:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_65=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2CWyEU0Acu5C for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 05:09:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3165921F8E8E for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 05:09:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by iaek3 with SMTP id k3so3596296iae.31 for ; Sat, 03 Dec 2011 05:09:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:from:to:cc:references:subject:date:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-priority:x-msmail-priority :x-mailer:x-mimeole; bh=5OvBypueQc79KFbbIWGC++UWJW7hHlFN3hztw89bHzk=; b=X3KxmbUsg8HRcWTfupq335Tby2GQZ8pyF7KqtWITzMVlyn82udTOiSQGCI/pSCjUdK v5gCzlFX4RWjZtl/Dqld260jMGWv/X1QuPwGazv+6h44R/p3P+ELunmCcT3c04S8mh0K rtLPIMUHKt06hruDFmwUxVMYzZW3nk3GHF/Kc= Received: by 10.42.153.5 with SMTP id k5mr2294363icw.46.1322917791966; Sat, 03 Dec 2011 05:09:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from computer ([114.240.70.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id mb4sm26316808igc.1.2011.12.03.05.09.31 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 03 Dec 2011 05:09:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <002301ccb1bc$d6c84980$ca01a8c0@computer> From: "Jiankang Yao" To: "Doug Barton" , "Olafur Gudmundsson" References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2011 21:09:00 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3664 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3664 Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2011 13:09:56 -0000 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Barton" To: "Olafur Gudmundsson" Cc: Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 6:43 AM Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon > On 12/02/2011 13:39, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote: >> The chairs have been asked by the AD's to prepare the working group >> for closing early next year. > > Suppressing my initial (not family-friendly) response, can I simply ask, > "Why?" > a very good question. there was a discussion log about closing the dnsext wg in 2007. pls see http://www.ietf.org/jabber/logs/dnsext/2007-03-21.html but it survives >From chairs'words, it is that AD request to close down the wg, not WG members. I think that IETF is a down to up organization, not a up to down organization. so any request to close down the wg should come from the wg. but it seems that we heard nothing about it until this message. Jiankang Yao > > -- > > "We could put the whole Internet into a book." > "Too practical." > > Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. > Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > dnsext mailing list > dnsext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext From paul.hoffman@vpnc.org Sat Dec 3 09:26:08 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36B0221F92D3 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 09:26:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.205 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.205 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.206, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_65=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IGMjiMBLdpxY for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 09:26:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E224B21F8F5F for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 09:26:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.100] (50-0-66-4.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.0.66.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pB3HQ2cY010403 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 3 Dec 2011 10:26:03 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Paul Hoffman X-Priority: 3 In-Reply-To: <002301ccb1bc$d6c84980$ca01a8c0@computer> Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2011 09:26:02 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7E643BE4-8E59-4C1A-B8EC-7EC430DD2A51@vpnc.org> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <002301ccb1bc$d6c84980$ca01a8c0@computer> To: Jiankang Yao X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Cc: DNSEXT Working Group Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2011 17:26:08 -0000 On Dec 3, 2011, at 5:09 AM, Jiankang Yao wrote: >> =46rom chairs'words, it is that AD request to close down the wg, not = WG=20 > members. > I think that IETF is a down to up organization, not a up to down = organization. > so any request to close down the wg should come from the wg. That would never happen. WGs always think they should exist, even when = they are producing almost nothing. > but it seems that we heard nothing about it until this message. That is simply not true, Jiankang. It has come up many times at the = face-to-face meetings, with a bunch of us saying we supported closing it = down. It sounds like the ADs finally got around to acting on what people had = asked for. --Paul Hoffman From Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz Sat Dec 3 10:20:05 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EB6D21F8E46 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 10:20:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_AVOID=2.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v4ix2jaBjGzM for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 10:20:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from stora.ogud.com (stora.ogud.com [66.92.146.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9A5F21F8E15 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 10:20:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from Work-Laptop-2.local (nyttbox.md.ogud.com [10.20.30.4]) by stora.ogud.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pB3IJp45037702; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 13:19:55 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz) Received: from [192.168.1.102] by Work-Laptop-2.local (PGP Universal service); Sat, 03 Dec 2011 13:19:55 -0500 X-PGP-Universal: processed; by Work-Laptop-2.local on Sat, 03 Dec 2011 13:19:55 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <7E643BE4-8E59-4C1A-B8EC-7EC430DD2A51@vpnc.org> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <002301ccb1bc$d6c84980$ca01a8c0@computer> <7E643BE4-8E59-4C1A-B8EC-7EC430DD2A51@vpnc.org> Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2011 13:19:48 -0500 To: DNSEXT Working Group From: Edward Lewis Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 10.20.30.4 Cc: ed.lewis@neustar.biz Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2011 18:20:05 -0000 At 9:26 -0800 12/3/11, Paul Hoffman wrote: >On Dec 3, 2011, at 5:09 AM, Jiankang Yao wrote: >> I think that IETF is a down to up organization, not a up to >> down organization so any request to close down the wg should come >> from the wg. > >That would never happen. WGs always think they should exist, even when >they are producing almost nothing. I certainly feel that closing down DNSEXT leaves a void in the standards world of the DNS protocol. However, the WG really hasn't shown much in the way of progress, even when viewed over the long haul. DNSEXT was formed in about 1999, with the conclusion of two other DNS related WGs. In the 12 year run how many documents made it to Full Standard or even Draft Standard? (Not very many.) The DNS protocol is a fairly simple protocol with a constrained mission. The fact is that there's a point at which continued tinkering becomes over-engineering. In some respects, we may have (arguably I emphasize) passed that point. What I have dealt with most recently is the deviation of implementations from the as-written specifications. In operations, there is no perceived problem, the protocol chunks along, there's a huge industry based on it. It's even created a large market for intangible assets - to put that mildly. Yet the documents have not kept pace. If there's work to do, it's not engineering, it's document clean up. There seems little appetite for that, which bodes poorly for a working group, especially one consisting of volunteers. The last document I worked was AXFR-"clarify" and I didn't even finish it because of what I perceived to be general apathy. The document was needed, and carried to the finish by Alfred, but I didn't see much of a "group" effort to work on it. Questions I have: Will the mail list continue? If so, how will current non-subscribers learn of the list? Who will be the focal point for questions from other WGs about DNS? Are all instructions to IANA complete and understood? -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis NeuStar You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468 Vote for the word of the day: "Papa"razzi - father that constantly takes photos of the baby Corpureaucracy - The institution of corporate "red tape" From rdroms@cisco.com Sat Dec 3 15:48:45 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DED681F0C35 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 15:48:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kYNGFh4Rq8JD for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 15:48:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01D1221F8C6F for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 15:48:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1877; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1322956125; x=1324165725; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=n12keSf3p3b4yirGKqWM8W2ZDNIthbA7SPsqZ56XiTQ=; b=Ri9AwADTPox9skUwz2cnfIwIrsavDeLpo1Yp4KZFdjSiLtuZkgTPPhsj lZSbQUn+NhwnUZZ/3OxQPhjgUV4IaG0rUnoPy9/zaLZMxhdUqhmfMKqgX BZIA6RbWzi8XYdHOURXQo11EfTI7orFShkFQUT8GUB4v4wxsX9pkX71pN M=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEABEppk6tJXG//2dsb2JhbACeW3iIcItlkjSGGQSGUIlBjxM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.69,617,1315180800"; d="scan'208";a="38428016" Received: from rcdn-core2-4.cisco.com ([173.37.113.191]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 03 Dec 2011 23:48:44 +0000 Received: from rtp-rdroms-8913.cisco.com (rtp-rdroms-8913.cisco.com [10.116.164.52]) by rcdn-core2-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pB3Nmhw7031413; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 23:48:44 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ralph Droms In-Reply-To: <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2011 18:48:45 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> To: Doug Barton X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Cc: DNSEXT Group Working Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2011 23:48:46 -0000 I recognize that DNS is a core Internet technology and I appreciate the = contributions of the WG to that technology over the years. At present, = it appears that the last new work was taken on the WG almost two years = ago, and the remaining charter items Olafur listed in his announcement = have been in process for at least two years. Based on that level of = activity and lack of new work in the WG queue, it seems to me to be = appropriate to wrap up the final charter items and close down the WG. Thanks to Ed Lewis for asking a few salient questions. We will keep the = dnsext mailing list open to provide a forum for future discussion of = dnsext issues. I would appreciate any recommendations on how to promote = awareness of the dnsext mailing list. The DNS Directorate will also = continue to provide expertise, advice to other WGs and review of IETF = documents. If some issue or issues rise to the level of IETF action, = e.g., the work on aliasing, we will consider chartering a single-topic = WG focused on that issue. =20 Ed: Can you say more about your last question? Are all instructions to IANA complete and understood? - Ralph On Dec 2, 2011, at 5:43 PM 12/2/11, Doug Barton wrote: > On 12/02/2011 13:39, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote: >> The chairs have been asked by the AD's to prepare the working group >> for closing early next year. >=20 > Suppressing my initial (not family-friendly) response, can I simply = ask, > "Why?" >=20 >=20 > --=20 >=20 > "We could put the whole Internet into a book." > "Too practical." >=20 > Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. > Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/ >=20 > _______________________________________________ > dnsext mailing list > dnsext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext From bmanning@karoshi.com Sat Dec 3 22:06:33 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67DAB21F93B4 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 22:06:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AJ1thfAywGnv for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 22:06:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from vacation.karoshi.com (vacation.karoshi.com [198.32.6.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 408C121F92BF for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 22:06:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from karoshi.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by vacation.karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id pB45qgFa028164; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 05:52:42 GMT Received: (from bmanning@localhost) by karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id pB45qaWm028163; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 05:52:36 GMT Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 05:52:36 +0000 From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com To: Ralph Droms Message-ID: <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Cc: DNSEXT Group Working Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 06:06:33 -0000 Ralph, wrt the "DNS Directorate" - if it is to remain, it would be useful to know who is on it, and why. What are the qualifications for joining/removal? There are quire a few people qho are highly qualified DNS folks who are not part of said directorate and it would be questionable to leaave such a censure board intact w/o due process. I would argue that if the WG is being disband, so should the rest of the support heirarchy, save the mailing list, which is open to anyone. YMMV of course, but I think leaving a directorate intact, unaccountable to the community, is a -really bad idea-. /bill On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 06:48:45PM -0500, Ralph Droms wrote: > I recognize that DNS is a core Internet technology and I appreciate the contributions of the WG to that technology over the years. At present, it appears that the last new work was taken on the WG almost two years ago, and the remaining charter items Olafur listed in his announcement have been in process for at least two years. Based on that level of activity and lack of new work in the WG queue, it seems to me to be appropriate to wrap up the final charter items and close down the WG. > > Thanks to Ed Lewis for asking a few salient questions. We will keep the dnsext mailing list open to provide a forum for future discussion of dnsext issues. I would appreciate any recommendations on how to promote awareness of the dnsext mailing list. The DNS Directorate will also continue to provide expertise, advice to other WGs and review of IETF documents. If some issue or issues rise to the level of IETF action, e.g., the work on aliasing, we will consider chartering a single-topic WG focused on that issue. > > Ed: Can you say more about your last question? > > Are all instructions to IANA complete and understood? > > - Ralph > > On Dec 2, 2011, at 5:43 PM 12/2/11, Doug Barton wrote: > > > On 12/02/2011 13:39, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote: > >> The chairs have been asked by the AD's to prepare the working group > >> for closing early next year. > > > > Suppressing my initial (not family-friendly) response, can I simply ask, > > "Why?" > > > > > > -- > > > > "We could put the whole Internet into a book." > > "Too practical." > > > > Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. > > Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dnsext mailing list > > dnsext@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext > > _______________________________________________ > dnsext mailing list > dnsext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext From sm@resistor.net Sat Dec 3 22:28:31 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C235721F8B64 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 22:28:31 -0800 (PST) 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=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fDdG74X9B+SZ for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 22:28:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 911B621F8B5A for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 22:28:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.4/8.14.5) with ESMTP id pB46SMCl025505 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 22:28:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1322980107; bh=YkiMAYxoRqGsWnBqIi/BDUi6x84TRAk/vrHyEdAHc1A=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=mHppRC7+Zt6gnMnWqNUDoIO2dqpcVeBacJiRpWNA218DySf8lZFPCVfhzSbrScdoi 0TK/tAFRLVsURDadbq+KxIT8di7iRVPJ7hvc4x42rlyoPVtkJZX3dc8E4RtZ1e4ELv EGVOjACCzK2CxWBlAaIPWYBKlVcV/61rowJPGo+4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1322980107; bh=YkiMAYxoRqGsWnBqIi/BDUi6x84TRAk/vrHyEdAHc1A=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=h5RNRv8LDScASsYdXnRGW5ZbFdRK/F9NKvQrPA1WU09MybTsbenj5Hgsg/ZQMXb7R DQxOizVNLAJ5ppXtX139b4P0MX+zFkNJALMnjZYu1OQx4jTw2jWqxkMdnnkmf3+7X7 k/7xxkI7GxigkreANh9JOETv6F/Hnd0rKxjozVAI= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20111203221451.0aa59360@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2011 22:26:45 -0800 To: DNSEXT Group Working From: SM In-Reply-To: <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 06:28:31 -0000 At 21:52 03-12-2011, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: > wrt the "DNS Directorate" - if it is to remain, it would be > useful to know > who is on it, and why. What are the qualifications for > joining/removal? http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/dns.html Regards, -sm From johnl@iecc.com Sat Dec 3 23:47:35 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 405F511E8083 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 23:47:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.478, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fxF+ItbYmB1u for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 23:47:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE7F611E8081 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 23:47:34 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 3622 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2011 07:47:33 -0000 Received: from gal.iecc.com (64.57.183.53) by mail2.iecc.com with SMTP; 4 Dec 2011 07:47:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 82751 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2011 07:47:32 -0000 Received: from leila.iecc.com (64.57.183.34) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 4 Dec 2011 07:47:32 -0000 Date: 4 Dec 2011 07:47:10 -0000 Message-ID: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> From: "John Levine" To: dnsext@ietf.org Organization: X-Headerized: yes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 07:47:35 -0000 Last month I sent in this draft which specifies an extension language for DNS master files, to make it easier to define new RR types without having to add new code to DNS servers every time. I think I saw some interest. Assuming dnsext shuts down, where would be a reasonable place to work on it? R's, John From jim@rfc1035.com Sun Dec 4 03:43:35 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 930A421F8541 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 03:43:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aOkWTmVZq4Gs for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 03:43:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from shaun.rfc1035.com (smtp.v6.rfc1035.com [IPv6:2001:4b10:100:7::25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1343521F853E for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 03:43:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from gromit.rfc1035.com (gromit.rfc1035.com [195.54.233.69]) by shaun.rfc1035.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52261CBC44C; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:43:28 +0000 (GMT) Message-Id: From: Jim Reid To: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com In-Reply-To: <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:43:28 +0000 References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) Cc: DNSEXT Group Working Subject: [dnsext] the DNS Directorate and the end of dnsext X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 11:43:35 -0000 On 4 Dec 2011, at 05:52, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: > YMMV of course, but I think leaving a directorate intact, > unaccountable to the community, is a -really bad idea-. Bill, whatever your views on the accountability or otherwise of the DNS Directorate, the topic is surely orthogonal to what happens to dnsext? I would presume the DNS Directorate (fine fellows that they are) are accountable by the wise words of advice given to the ADs and WGs whenever they need them. That said, it should be easier to find the Directorates' home page on the IETF web site. [Perhaps a link on the left hand-side, just like there is for WGs, IESG and so on.] It seems this can only be found by feeding "Directorate" into the search box in the top corner of www.ietf.org. From drc@virtualized.org Sun Dec 4 07:43:05 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BD4821F8508 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 07:43:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.5 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.100, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G1D1PPqahHCD for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 07:43:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from trantor.virtualized.org (trantor.virtualized.org [IPv6:2607:fc50:1000:9700::dead:beef]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 166C821F8507 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 07:43:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.2] (c-24-4-109-25.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.4.109.25]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: drc) by trantor.virtualized.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CDEE01705A; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:43:01 +0000 (UTC) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: David Conrad In-Reply-To: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 07:42:59 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5CB1137F-C5EB-4D21-988F-A601C3869FD4@virtualized.org> References: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> To: John Levine X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 15:43:05 -0000 On Dec 3, 2011, at 11:47 PM, John Levine wrote: > Last month I sent in this draft which specifies an extension language > for DNS master files, to make it easier to define new RR types without > having to add new code to DNS servers every time. >=20 > I think I saw some interest. Assuming dnsext shuts down, where would > be a reasonable place to work on it? Well, you could hold a BOF and if there is sufficient interest, spin up = a DNSLANG (or whatever) working group... Regards, -drc From paul.hoffman@vpnc.org Sun Dec 4 08:17:54 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F40D21F85A1 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 08:17:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.493 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.493 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.106, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l3e+diIooPXg for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 08:17:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 273C421F8593 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 08:17:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.100] (50-0-66-4.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.0.66.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pB4GHnS2046700 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 4 Dec 2011 09:17:50 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Paul Hoffman In-Reply-To: <5CB1137F-C5EB-4D21-988F-A601C3869FD4@virtualized.org> Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 08:17:49 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> <5CB1137F-C5EB-4D21-988F-A601C3869FD4@virtualized.org> To: John Levine X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Cc: DNSEXT Working Group Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 16:17:54 -0000 On Dec 4, 2011, at 7:42 AM, David Conrad wrote: > On Dec 3, 2011, at 11:47 PM, John Levine wrote: >> Last month I sent in this draft which specifies an extension language >> for DNS master files, to make it easier to define new RR types = without >> having to add new code to DNS servers every time. >>=20 >> I think I saw some interest. Assuming dnsext shuts down, where would >> be a reasonable place to work on it? >=20 > Well, you could hold a BOF and if there is sufficient interest, spin = up a DNSLANG (or whatever) working group... Alternately, you could just keep discussing it on this list (which Ralph = said would remain alive) until Ralph thought the draft was mature enough = for an Individual Submission. There is no IETF process rule that says an out-of-charter idea needs to = have any face-to-face BoF, nor any WG. In fact, the process is quite = clear that the opposite is true. --Paul Hoffman From drc@virtualized.org Sun Dec 4 08:26:30 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03A4721F85A1 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 08:26:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.232 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.232 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.367, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QYlnJa9O1oA0 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 08:26:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from trantor.virtualized.org (trantor.virtualized.org [IPv6:2607:fc50:1000:9700::dead:beef]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F0F921F8564 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 08:26:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.2] (c-24-4-109-25.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.4.109.25]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: drc) by trantor.virtualized.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 226B81705A; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 16:26:29 +0000 (UTC) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: David Conrad In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 08:26:27 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <8EDAE745-2E56-4528-8B46-9E714035D62C@virtualized.org> References: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> <5CB1137F-C5EB-4D21-988F-A601C3869FD4@virtualized.org> To: Paul Hoffman X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Cc: dnsext Group Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 16:26:30 -0000 On Dec 4, 2011, at 8:17 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > Alternately, you could just keep discussing it on this list (which = Ralph said would remain alive) until Ralph thought the draft was mature = enough for an Individual Submission. Sure. I'll admit I'm unclear as to when something is deemed WG-worthy (I = thought that was the point of a BoF, but apparently I am mistaken). > There is no IETF process rule that says an out-of-charter idea needs = to have any face-to-face BoF ... If DNSEXT were to be shut down, there would no longer be a charter to be = out-of. Regards, -drc From johnl@iecc.com Sun Dec 4 10:40:58 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CB0521F84A5 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 10:40:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6mHDlNfsEmwK for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 10:40:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9684E21F849B for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 10:40:57 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 22687 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2011 18:40:56 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:vbr-info:user-agent:cleverness; s=589e.4edbbeb8.k1112; bh=Uz4az2VBg9rtTAUwj1iWED8FwLwZvhCELMMwzgvzwtY=; b=H6RvduPLLJ8RepV2YK8JidUg5/gR+6As1eP/zaKaxg/qPyzjhh5XrCbKYtMpt9q9SCc2zAGYMKPC3eQzeQ+UTIl6fJuOpt1YvvQRD6+xdiRoj8ljnS2hlls/MgB7wqiPGxrs/aXz4JRcW3kRzHrrZch2DU7uNaA6V56VZoLOaLQ= VBR-Info: md=iecc.com; mc=all; mv=dwl.spamhaus.org Received: (ofmipd 127.0.0.1) with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 4 Dec 2011 18:40:34 -0000 Date: 4 Dec 2011 10:40:54 -0800 Message-ID: From: "John R. Levine" To: "David Conrad" In-Reply-To: <5CB1137F-C5EB-4D21-988F-A601C3869FD4@virtualized.org> References: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> <5CB1137F-C5EB-4D21-988F-A601C3869FD4@virtualized.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) Cleverness: None detected MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 18:40:58 -0000 >> I think I saw some interest. Assuming dnsext shuts down, where would >> be a reasonable place to work on it? > > Well, you could hold a BOF and if there is sufficient interest, spin up a DNSLANG (or whatever) working group... Assuming I can figure out how to pay my way to Paris, sounds like a plan. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly From msk@cloudmark.com Sun Dec 4 11:13:35 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBAEC21F8479 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:13:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.67 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.67 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.071, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tJc4yEOnGJhV for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:13:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BEBE21F8478 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:13:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from malice.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.71) by EXCH-HTCAS901.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:13:34 -0800 Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by malice.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.71]) with mapi; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:13:34 -0800 From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" To: "dnsext@ietf.org" Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:13:38 -0800 Thread-Topic: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 Thread-Index: AcyyWQWI54f5Z4khSZep5wPnxNEJ3gAX7+LA Message-ID: References: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> In-Reply-To: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 19:13:35 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dnsext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf = Of John Levine > Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 11:47 PM > To: dnsext@ietf.org > Subject: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 >=20 > Last month I sent in this draft which specifies an extension language > for DNS master files, to make it easier to define new RR types without > having to add new code to DNS servers every time. >=20 > I think I saw some interest. Assuming dnsext shuts down, where would > be a reasonable place to work on it? If you're adverse to doing individual submissions, you could try OPSAWG. From msk@cloudmark.com Sun Dec 4 11:21:50 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3629D21F86B3 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:21:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.668 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.668 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.069, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id toFSMekP4umY for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:21:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from ht2-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht2-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2D2F21F86A4 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:21:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by spite.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.72]) with mapi; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:21:49 -0800 From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" To: "dnsext@ietf.org" Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:21:54 -0800 Thread-Topic: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 Thread-Index: AcyyWQWI54f5Z4khSZep5wPnxNEJ3gAX7+LAAAA9ABA= Message-ID: References: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 19:21:50 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dnsext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf = Of Murray S. Kucherawy > Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 11:14 AM > To: dnsext@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 >=20 > If you're adverse to doing individual submissions, you could try > OPSAWG. Sorry, dnsext is in INT, so that should be the INTAREA working group. From bmanning@karoshi.com Sun Dec 4 13:24:55 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A79021F8AD3 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 13:24:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yTyi3jZs64xW for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 13:24:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from vacation.karoshi.com (vacation.karoshi.com [198.32.6.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEB6E21F8AE6 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 13:24:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from karoshi.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by vacation.karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id pB4LOgFa030095; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 21:24:47 GMT Received: (from bmanning@localhost) by karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id pB4LOgQJ030094; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 21:24:42 GMT Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 21:24:42 +0000 From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com To: SM Message-ID: <20111204212442.GB29945@vacation.karoshi.com.> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> <6.2.5.6.2.20111203221451.0aa59360@resistor.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20111203221451.0aa59360@resistor.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Cc: DNSEXT Group Working Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 21:24:55 -0000 On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 10:26:45PM -0800, SM wrote: > At 21:52 03-12-2011, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: > > wrt the "DNS Directorate" - if it is to remain, it would be > >useful to know > > who is on it, and why. What are the qualifications for > >joining/removal? > > http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/dns.html care to answer the second part of the first question and then the second question? /bill > > Regards, > -sm > > _______________________________________________ > dnsext mailing list > dnsext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext From ogud@ogud.com Sun Dec 4 13:46:11 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EC8021F8AAA for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 13:46:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lxVBA11LgnJm for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 13:46:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from stora.ogud.com (stora.ogud.com [66.92.146.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47E8321F888A for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 13:46:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (nyttbox.md.ogud.com [10.20.30.4]) by stora.ogud.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pB4Lk7b7054024 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 16:46:08 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from ogud@ogud.com) Message-ID: <4EDBEA1D.4040806@ogud.com> Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 16:46:05 -0500 From: Olafur Gudmundsson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dnsext@ietf.org References: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> In-Reply-To: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 10.20.30.4 Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 21:46:11 -0000 Any reason you think this can not be finished in the next 3 months ? Olafur On 04/12/2011 02:47, John Levine wrote: > Last month I sent in this draft which specifies an extension language > for DNS master files, to make it easier to define new RR types without > having to add new code to DNS servers every time. > > I think I saw some interest. Assuming dnsext shuts down, where would > be a reasonable place to work on it? > > R's, > John > > > > _______________________________________________ > dnsext mailing list > dnsext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext > > > From paul.hoffman@vpnc.org Sun Dec 4 14:24:52 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 665CF21F8B2E for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 14:24:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 54S5HviuRkTn for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 14:24:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9A4F21F8B2A for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 14:24:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.100] (50-0-66-4.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.0.66.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pB4MOoDX055972 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:24:51 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Paul Hoffman In-Reply-To: <4EDBEA1D.4040806@ogud.com> Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 14:24:50 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> <4EDBEA1D.4040806@ogud.com> To: Olafur Gudmundsson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 22:24:52 -0000 On Dec 4, 2011, at 1:46 PM, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote: > Any reason you think this can not be finished in the next 3 months ? What in the history of the efficiency of this WG for the past few years = makes you think it could be? --Paul Hoffman From marka@isc.org Sun Dec 4 15:02:22 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13DFF1F0C34 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:02:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id krGmkZMi4MpZ for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:02:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ams1.isc.org (mx.ams1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:500:60::65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D726921F8B04 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:02:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from bikeshed.isc.org (bikeshed.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:d::19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "bikeshed.isc.org", Issuer "ISC CA" (verified OK)) by mx.ams1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 685825F9911; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 23:01:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:820:fce5:1941:667f:5022]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CF2EC216C6B; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 23:01:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by drugs.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF424190D6B3; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 10:01:52 +1100 (EST) To: Paul Hoffman From: Mark Andrews References: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> <4EDBEA1D.4040806@ogud.com> In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 04 Dec 2011 14:24:50 -0800." MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----- =_aaaaaaaaaa0" Content-ID: <33299.1323039530.0@drugs.dv.isc.org> Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 10:01:52 +1100 Message-Id: <20111204230152.BF424190D6B3@drugs.dv.isc.org> Cc: dnsext@ietf.org, Olafur Gudmundsson Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 23:02:22 -0000 ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <33299.1323039530.1@drugs.dv.isc.org> On a similar matter I was in the process of submitting the following. I just needed to address internal comments. I also think my EDNS expire option still needs to be addressed though I suspect I'll do that as a individual submission. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0 Content-Type: text/plain; name="draft-andrews-dnsext-ipv6-fragmentation.txt"; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <33299.1323039530.2@drugs.dv.isc.org> M. Andrews Internet-Draft ISC Intended status: Standards Track November 4, 2011 Expires: May 7, 2012 DNS and UDP Fragmentation draft-andrews-dnsext-udp-fragmentation. Abstract This document provides advice to DNS developers about sending DNS UDP messages and Path MTU Discovery. Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." This Internet-Draft will expire on May 7, 2012. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Andrews Expires May 7, 2012 [Page 1] Internet-Draft DNS and UDP Fragmentation November 2011 Table of Contents 1. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Reserved Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. IPv4 and Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. IPv6 and Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Andrews Expires May 7, 2012 [Page 2] Internet-Draft DNS and UDP Fragmentation November 2011 1. Background IPv6 has changed the dynamics of UDP, Path MTU Discovery (PMTUD) and IP fragmentation. With IPv4 DNS/UDP packets were fragmented by the network and no PMTUD was performed. With IPv6 fragmentation occurs in the sending node and PMTUD is alway performed unless the IPv6 packet is fragmented by the sending node using the network MTU. DNS/UDP does not work well when PMTUD discover is performed. If the Packet Too Big / Need Fragmentation ICMP messages are not received there is no feedback path in DNS to reduce the size of the fragments like there is with TCP. This document recommends that all DNS/UDP messages are sent such that they do not trigger PMTUD. 1.1. Reserved Words The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC 2119]. 2. IPv4 and Fragmentation There are a number of IP stacks that enable PMTUD for all IP packets by default against the advice of [RFC 1191]. On those IP stacks it is necessary for the application to disable PMTUD on a per socket/ packet basis or for the operator to disable it globally if there is no per socket/packet control. 3. IPv6 and Fragmentation It was realised that IPv6 changed the way PMTUD happened and that there were application, like DNS, that did not work well with PMTUD. For those applications a socket option called IPV6_USE_MIN_MTU was developed [RFC 3542]. It is RECOMMENDED that this option be set to 1 (one) when sending DNS/UDP messages over IPv6. This option can be set at the socket level or it can be set on a per UDP datagram basis. If the IPv6 stack does not support IPV6_USE_MIN_MTU steps should be taken to prevent PMTUD occuring. These include, but are not limited to, setting the interface the packets are being sent over should be set to the network MTU (1280 bytes) or restricing DNS/UDP packets to no more than 1280 bytes including IPv6 headers. Andrews Expires May 7, 2012 [Page 3] Internet-Draft DNS and UDP Fragmentation November 2011 4. IANA Considerations No IANA Considerations. 5. Security Considerations Failure to prevent PMTUD discovery can lead to denial of service for DNS clients. Firewalls are often configured to block fragmented IP packets as early IP stacks had fragmentation re-assembly bugs. These bugs were exploited to perform a number of denial of service attacks cira 1999. Such blocks should be relaxed to permit fragmented UDP packets. 6. Normative References [RFC 1191] Mogul, J. and S. Deering, "Path MTU Discovery", RFC 1191, November 1990. [RFC 2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC 3542] Stevens, W., Thomas, M., Normark, E., and T. Jinmei, "Advanced Sockets Application Program Interface (API) for IPv6", RFC 2003, May 2003. Author's Address Mark P. Andrews Internet Systems Consortium 950 Charter Street Redwood City, CA 94063 US Email: marka@isc.org Andrews Expires May 7, 2012 [Page 4] ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0-- From drc@virtualized.org Sun Dec 4 15:11:12 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2548721F8B30 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:11:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.232 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.232 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.367, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YL2JUbilSyLr for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:11:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from trantor.virtualized.org (trantor.virtualized.org [IPv6:2607:fc50:1000:9700::dead:beef]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62C5A21F8AF7 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:11:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.2] (c-24-4-109-25.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.4.109.25]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: drc) by trantor.virtualized.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D6C7B1705A; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 23:11:10 +0000 (UTC) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: David Conrad In-Reply-To: <20111204230152.BF424190D6B3@drugs.dv.isc.org> Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:11:08 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <671BE797-A89A-42B4-BA53-CA511B5CD5B1@virtualized.org> References: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> <4EDBEA1D.4040806@ogud.com> <20111204230152.BF424190D6B3@drugs.dv.isc.org> To: Mark Andrews X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Cc: dnsext Group Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 23:11:12 -0000 Mark, > > DNS and UDP Fragmentation > draft-andrews-dnsext-udp-fragmentation. Wouldn't this be appropriate for DNSOP? Regards, -drc From bmanning@karoshi.com Sun Dec 4 15:26:19 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FB9E21F8B0C for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:26:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fW6hw5NXJQ7J for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:26:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from vacation.karoshi.com (vacation.karoshi.com [198.32.6.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8C1121F8B04 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:26:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from karoshi.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by vacation.karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id pB4NQ2Fa030306; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 23:26:07 GMT Received: (from bmanning@localhost) by karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id pB4NPu4D030305; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 23:25:56 GMT Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 23:25:56 +0000 From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com To: Jim Reid Message-ID: <20111204232556.GA30268@vacation.karoshi.com.> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Cc: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com, DNSEXT Group Working Subject: Re: [dnsext] the DNS Directorate and the end of dnsext X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 23:26:19 -0000 On Sun, Dec 04, 2011 at 11:43:28AM +0000, Jim Reid wrote: > On 4 Dec 2011, at 05:52, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: > > >YMMV of course, but I think leaving a directorate intact, > >unaccountable to the community, is a -really bad idea-. > > Bill, whatever your views on the accountability or otherwise of the > DNS Directorate, the topic is surely orthogonal to what happens to > dnsext? perhaps. if a directorate exists without a foundational wg to support it, what you end up with is an effective censure board that rules on proposed changes to the DNS, absent broad input from the community. absent a WG, what are the rules for becoming a member of the directorate and how is a member removed for cause? If you are comfortable w/ the IESG and the ADs making DNS protocol choices on yur behalf, then that is your perogative. I for one, am not and would like the ability to have/conviene a WG to solve DNS issues -BY THE COMMUNITY- and not by a closed, opaque body that is not accountable to that community. > I would presume the DNS Directorate (fine fellows that they are) are > accountable by the wise words of advice given to the ADs and WGs > whenever they need them. That said, it should be easier to find the > Directorates' home page on the IETF web site. [Perhaps a link on the > left hand-side, just like there is for WGs, IESG and so on.] It seems > this can only be found by feeding "Directorate" into the search box in > the top corner of www.ietf.org. I have the answer on who, we don't have answers on succession or accountablity /bill From marka@isc.org Sun Dec 4 15:34:48 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 254AD21F8B0C for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:34:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vz1dw3x6WPu7 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:34:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ams1.isc.org (mx.ams1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:500:60::65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2C8221F8AFB for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:34:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from bikeshed.isc.org (bikeshed.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:d::19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "bikeshed.isc.org", Issuer "ISC CA" (verified OK)) by mx.ams1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4B595F9906; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 23:34:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:820:fce5:1941:667f:5022]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2A68C216C6A; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 23:34:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by drugs.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4298190DE42; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 10:34:18 +1100 (EST) To: David Conrad From: Mark Andrews References: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> <4EDBEA1D.4040806@ogud.com> <20111204230152.BF424190D6B3@drugs.dv.isc.org> <671BE797-A89A-42B4-BA53-CA511B5CD5B1@virtualized.org> In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 04 Dec 2011 15:11:08 -0800." <671BE797-A89A-42B4-BA53-CA511B5CD5B1@virtualized.org> Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 10:34:18 +1100 Message-Id: <20111204233418.C4298190DE42@drugs.dv.isc.org> Cc: dnsext Group Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 23:34:48 -0000 In message <671BE797-A89A-42B4-BA53-CA511B5CD5B1@virtualized.org>, David Conrad writes: > Mark, > > > > > DNS and UDP Fragmentation > > draft-andrews-dnsext-udp-fragmentation. > > Wouldn't this be appropriate for DNSOP? > > Regards, > -drc No. It should be code not configuration. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org From sm@resistor.net Sun Dec 4 16:05:13 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E21CC21F8B37 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 16:05:13 -0800 (PST) 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 ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nbcbo9LiqI6z for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 16:05:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B914221F8B34 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 16:05:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.4/8.14.5) with ESMTP id pB5053i9028136 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 16:05:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1323043507; bh=L4IGpTsR34XA6Ziru2nw+fqBTAYPOIopkouwD8I8AXg=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=kAZ39Klqwdv+jWaqaPKOTYNzzMSq36TsOSMvLDo83difaWOuYCvFx+VbTxdvVWxlQ ytNLovSTHASsNBgEk7t9db/B9zq3pU7g+bYSlV2yi7CueMYNjhZJU0PfAben2idCJh F2G2bYSsjiMKgEzkMlx2dmOLj8A0ZF8OAn+gflNg= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1323043507; bh=L4IGpTsR34XA6Ziru2nw+fqBTAYPOIopkouwD8I8AXg=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=gUj7xaDqBVbDyS2zrbQxMAW16L5+bIZRXm73fT3Il1B7dwihSfbVjguNyDI+74ZJb vICpzRPg45cUnYI8KR4g5lN4vXnf1+xR91ItFMkU+si/SjIJyfosjA3fXHhBHEQ2wy GmPaRHFKKbL8X+zeHXnhO+cBwMDtRWUwgpHQp1hk= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20111204152439.0976f8f8@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 15:35:36 -0800 To: DNSEXT Group Working From: SM In-Reply-To: <20111204212442.GB29945@vacation.karoshi.com.> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> <6.2.5.6.2.20111203221451.0aa59360@resistor.net> <20111204212442.GB29945@vacation.karoshi.com.> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 00:05:14 -0000 At 13:24 04-12-2011, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: > care to answer the second part of the first question and > then the second question? I don't know the answer to those questions. Regards, -sm From jim@rfc1035.com Sun Dec 4 17:08:24 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E5E821F847F for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 17:08:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vizt0yjPrv3k for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 17:08:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from shaun.rfc1035.com (smtp.v6.rfc1035.com [IPv6:2001:4b10:100:7::25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5DFE21F8469 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 17:08:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from gromit.rfc1035.com (gromit.rfc1035.com [195.54.233.69]) by shaun.rfc1035.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F53DCBC44C; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 01:08:21 +0000 (GMT) Message-Id: <7A0435E4-C0D0-4D0B-A6C0-B2704B8AFFC3@rfc1035.com> From: Jim Reid To: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com In-Reply-To: <20111204232556.GA30268@vacation.karoshi.com.> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 01:08:20 +0000 References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> <20111204232556.GA30268@vacation.karoshi.com.> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) Cc: DNSEXT Group Working Subject: Re: [dnsext] the DNS Directorate and the end of dnsext X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 01:08:24 -0000 On 4 Dec 2011, at 23:25, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: > perhaps. if a directorate exists without a foundational > wg to support it What, just like pretty much all the other IETF directorates: http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate.html? Could dnsop serve as your "foundational wg"? If not, why not? > what you end up with is an effective censure board > that rules on proposed changes to the DNS, absent broad input > from the community. I think you're being over-dramatic. The role of the DNS Directorate is very clear. At least it is once you find its home page: http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/dns.html . :-) It's a bit of a stretch to claim dnsdir constitutes an "effective censure board that rules on proposed changes to the DNS". > absent a WG, what are the rules for becoming a member of the > directorate and how is a member removed for cause? Oh. You believe the IETF is a democracy with bureacucratic procedures. I see. :-) I do agree that you have a valid point in how DNS directorate members are chosen and retired. This still has nothing to do with the winding up of dnsext IMO. > If you are comfortable w/ the IESG and the ADs making > DNS protocol choices on yur behalf, then that is your perogative. I didn't say that and I very much doubt our friends in the DNS directorate see their role like that either. Though since there's no reports on what they do/say, how could someone from the outside know? > I for one, am not and would like the ability to have/conviene > a WG to solve DNS issues -BY THE COMMUNITY- and not by a closed, > opaque body that is not accountable to that community. +1. I would expect that if the DNS Directorate was confronted with something that looked like a protocol change, they'd do The Right Thing. ie Get the Powers That Be to create and charter a new WG. > I have the answer on who, we don't have answers on succession > or accountablity By all means continue to bang that drum Bill. But please don't confuse that with the demise of dnsext. From bmanning@karoshi.com Sun Dec 4 18:39:54 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30B1021F8ABC for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 18:39:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2a2aUvh6MNQl for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 18:39:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from vacation.karoshi.com (vacation.karoshi.com [198.32.6.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD27221F8AB9 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 18:39:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from karoshi.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by vacation.karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id pB52daFa030664; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 02:39:41 GMT Received: (from bmanning@localhost) by karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id pB52dVo7030663; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 02:39:31 GMT Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 02:39:30 +0000 From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com To: Jim Reid Message-ID: <20111205023930.GA30651@vacation.karoshi.com.> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> <20111204232556.GA30268@vacation.karoshi.com.> <7A0435E4-C0D0-4D0B-A6C0-B2704B8AFFC3@rfc1035.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7A0435E4-C0D0-4D0B-A6C0-B2704B8AFFC3@rfc1035.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Cc: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com, DNSEXT Group Working Subject: Re: [dnsext] the DNS Directorate and the end of dnsext X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 02:39:54 -0000 On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 01:08:20AM +0000, Jim Reid wrote: > > I think you're being over-dramatic. as may be... > > absent a WG, what are the rules for becoming a member of the > >directorate and how is a member removed for cause? > > Oh. You believe the IETF is a democracy with bureacucratic procedures. > I see. :-) I do agree that you have a valid point in how DNS > directorate members are chosen and retired. This still has nothing to > do with the winding up of dnsext IMO. actually, it kind of does - the directorate came into existance to support dnsext - absent dnsext, there is no good reason to keep an private, non-transparent group around making policy choices (Ralph indicated they would be taking on this role...) > > > If you are comfortable w/ the IESG and the ADs making > > DNS protocol choices on yur behalf, then that is your perogative. > > I didn't say that and I very much doubt our friends in the DNS > directorate see their role like that either. Though since there's no > reports on what they do/say, how could someone from the outside know? we wouldn't and there is no way to find out. pretty much the definition of a cenusre board, star chamber, or kangaroo court. completely unaccuntable. > > I for one, am not and would like the ability to have/conviene > > a WG to solve DNS issues -BY THE COMMUNITY- and not by a closed, > > opaque body that is not accountable to that community. > > +1. I would expect that if the DNS Directorate was confronted with > something that looked like a protocol change, they'd do The Right > Thing. ie Get the Powers That Be to create and charter a new WG. really? do you want to test that? why couldnt the community do it? like they have for the past 25 years. > > I have the answer on who, we don't have answers on succession > > or accountablity > > By all means continue to bang that drum Bill. But please don't confuse > that with the demise of dnsext. as long as they are tied together - then they will get mentioned together. From ajs@anvilwalrusden.com Sun Dec 4 19:35:12 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3FAF11E8090 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 19:35:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.475 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.475 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.124, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qsyekKUA5Jiu for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 19:35:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C4C911E8073 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 19:35:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from shinkuro.com (69-196-144-227.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.144.227]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 08E7D1ECB41C for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 03:34:54 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 22:35:09 -0500 From: Andrew Sullivan To: dnsext@ietf.org Message-ID: <20111205033509.GC84440@shinkuro.com> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> <20111204232556.GA30268@vacation.karoshi.com.> <7A0435E4-C0D0-4D0B-A6C0-B2704B8AFFC3@rfc1035.com> <20111205023930.GA30651@vacation.karoshi.com.> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111205023930.GA30651@vacation.karoshi.com.> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [dnsext] the DNS Directorate and the end of dnsext X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 03:35:12 -0000 On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 02:39:30AM +0000, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: > actually, it kind of does - the directorate came into existance to > support dnsext As far as I understand the purpose of directorates, they are designed to provide support for ADs, and not for WGs. My understanding of the DNS Directorate and its structure conforms to that. The Directorate's composition will, I suppose, perhaps need adjustment, because two of its members (Olafur and me) will disappear: our roles are ex-officio, and in the event there's no office, there's no office to be out of. In any case, > as long as they are tied together - then they will get mentioned > together. they are plainly not tied together. For instance, the DNS Directorate also serves the OPS ADs, and the chairs of DNSOP are ex-officio members too. Best, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com From d3e3e3@gmail.com Sun Dec 4 20:09:27 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93C1E21F87E2 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 20:09:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.749 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Gk4FmhSOc831 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 20:09:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45ABD21F86F6 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 20:09:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by lagw12 with SMTP id w12so643924lag.31 for ; Sun, 04 Dec 2011 20:09:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ex8k5pxsxnPmsK3Is87BH5m6o89qzflqGrLuX95xjoM=; b=LZ5d167q2VolkohO3cDhWX5Ryecf56Wx6Q9BYbyTCyW5tu29Y975U5yIwBGCBa2IqT g9hkOnOISVFpIR17PLAEM70SCemRbKHMsgeAYiMwjQmnMFFEHgjerlDvNY9he2z2WqN9 mPV/27XRVN+d/F3KUAzJ5blh9+6NsVullmrno= Received: by 10.152.130.71 with SMTP id oc7mr4766793lab.25.1323058155712; Sun, 04 Dec 2011 20:09:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.11.99 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 20:08:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> From: Donald Eastlake Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 23:08:54 -0500 Message-ID: To: Olafur Gudmundsson , Andrew Sullivan Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 04:09:27 -0000 If I recall correctly, there was significant support for draft-eastlake-dnsext-xnamercode In fact, looking back, there was a WG Last Call issued on this draft on April 13th of this year with favorable responses. Can this be advanced? Thanks, Donald =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D =A0Donald E. Eastlake 3rd=A0=A0 +1-508-333-2270 (cell) =A0155 Beaver Street,=A0Milford, MA 01757 USA =A0d3e3e3@gmail.com On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > The chairs have been asked by the AD's to prepare the working group > for closing early next year. > > Before the working group closes we need to complete the drafts that > are on our charter. > > Here is the list of current open milestones: > =A0Apr 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 RFC3597-bis Unknown RR advanced to IESG for PS > =A0Jun 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 EDNS0-bis update advanced to IESG > =A0Aug 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 Algorithm signaling document to IESG > =A0Oct 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 DNSSEC Errata document to IESG > =A0Nov 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 Decision about new protocol elements, if any > =A0Nov 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 Requirements and current state survey document to= IESG > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0for publication > =A0Dec 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 IXFR-only to IESG > > As you can see we are far behind schedule thus we propose the > following milestones > =A0Dec 2011 =A0DNSSEC-errata document to IESG > =A0Jan 2012 =A0RFC3597-bis To IESG for standard > =A0Jan 2012 =A0EDNS0-bis update to IESG > =A0Feb 2012 =A0IXFR-Only to IESG > =A0Feb 2012 =A0Algorithm signaling document to IESG > =A0Mar 2012 =A0Close down Working group > > Note that this removes the aliasing work from the work plan. =A0The > draft is currently expired, and there was not general agreement about > whether to wait on input from the current ICANN work on variants at > the TLD (but apparently we did wait). =A0Since ICANN's project is not > scheduled to complete before February of 2012, we can't realistically > expect to complete a requirements document before March. =A0So we are > planning not to complete that work item. =A0It is not clear whether a WG > that is closing with unfinished business needs to recharter as a > formal step; we're looking into that, and will return with an answer. > > Best regards, > > Olafur and Andrew > _______________________________________________ > dnsext mailing list > dnsext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext From stephan.lagerholm@secure64.com Sun Dec 4 20:49:27 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF0DF1F0C34 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 20:49:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.495 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 73dYWn5gFEzX for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 20:49:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from zimbra.secure64.com (unknown [64.92.221.189]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E98321F845F for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 20:49:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.secure64.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBCCDB844A; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 21:49:25 -0700 (MST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at secure64.com Received: from zimbra.secure64.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.secure64.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JkBXRzNfrxhX; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 21:49:24 -0700 (MST) Received: from exchange.secure64.com (exchange.secure64.com [192.168.254.250]) by zimbra.secure64.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B7ED4B8440; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 21:49:24 -0700 (MST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=secure64.com; s=2010; t=1323060564; bh=LTiJB9m2KivC1Ca9XPf1WCwoL73SvBwdhdkzdEpXsVE=; h=MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Subject:Date: Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:From:To; b=IZrrLJFXfCMVD6XkCYfER FtxXmGRTkOTmyQky7/CJY8Zjch3+o16ue/nwgKZ4lhYoADr2p2WA+qVerAWkCfH1NRT +fDqtPFd9lMjtVXvONDyj6U8CGh8aMWydjKfQEmVBi+SS6rF3xh3XqprX++h1zsCCvf QM/kNTgZGIBu+HC0= 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: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 21:49:30 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20111204230152.BF424190D6B3@drugs.dv.isc.org> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: draft-andrews-dnsext-ipv6-fragmentation Thread-Index: Acyy2NlYQmC5zdkaQB6aPN19+15HxwALx0CA References: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> <4EDBEA1D.4040806@ogud.com> <20111204230152.BF424190D6B3@drugs.dv.isc.org> From: "Stephan Lagerholm" To: "Mark Andrews" , Subject: [dnsext] draft-andrews-dnsext-ipv6-fragmentation X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 04:49:28 -0000 Hi Mark, You can get blocked ICMP 'packet too big' even if you have the MTU set to 1280.=20 RFC 2460: In response to an IPv6 packet that is sent to an IPv4 destination (i.e., a packet that undergoes translation from IPv6=20 to IPv4), the originating IPv6 node may receive an ICMP Packet Too Big message reporting a Next-Hop MTU less than 1280.=20 In that case, the IPv6 node is not required to reduce the size of subsequent packets to less than 1280, but must include=20 a Fragment header in those packets so that the IPv6-to-IPv4 translating router can obtain a suitable Identification=20 value to use in resulting IPv4 fragments. Note that this means the payload may have to be reduced to 1232 octets (1280=20 minus 40 for the IPv6 header and 8 for the Fragment header), and smaller still if additional extension headers are used. /Stephan > -----Original Message----- > From: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dnsext-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Mark Andrews > Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 6:02 PM > To: Paul Hoffman > Cc: dnsext@ietf.org; Olafur Gudmundsson > Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 >=20 > On a similar matter I was in the process of submitting the following. > I just needed to address internal comments. I also think my EDNS > expire option still needs to be addressed though I suspect I'll do that > as a individual submission. >=20 > Mark > -- > Mark Andrews, ISC > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia > PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org From marka@isc.org Sun Dec 4 21:25:03 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 785DD1F0C3F; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 21:25:03 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER SECTION, Duplicate header field: "Cc" X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FCdmdKFfjkdO; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 21:25:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ams1.isc.org (mx.ams1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:500:60::65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD5071F0C36; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 21:24:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from bikeshed.isc.org (bikeshed.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:d::19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "bikeshed.isc.org", Issuer "ISC CA" (verified OK)) by mx.ams1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50CD15F9906; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 05:24:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:820:fce5:1941:667f:5022]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B6787216C6B; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 05:24:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by drugs.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4DA81913544; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:24:36 +1100 (EST) To: "Stephan Lagerholm" From: Mark Andrews References: <20111204074710.64552.qmail@joyce.lan> <4EDBEA1D.4040806@ogud.com> <20111204230152.BF424190D6B3@drugs.dv.isc.org> In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 04 Dec 2011 21:49:30 PDT." Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 16:24:36 +1100 Message-Id: <20111205052436.C4DA81913544@drugs.dv.isc.org> Cc: 6man@ietf.org, dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-andrews-dnsext-ipv6-fragmentation X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 05:25:03 -0000 In message , "Ste phan Lagerholm" writes: > Hi Mark, > > You can get blocked ICMP 'packet too big' even if you have the MTU set > to 1280.=20 > > RFC 2460: > In response to an IPv6 packet that is sent to an IPv4 destination (i.e., > a packet that undergoes translation from IPv6=20 > to IPv4), the originating IPv6 node may receive an ICMP Packet Too Big > message reporting a Next-Hop MTU less than 1280.=20 > In that case, the IPv6 node is not required to reduce the size of > subsequent packets to less than 1280, but must include=20 > a Fragment header in those packets so that the IPv6-to-IPv4 translating > router can obtain a suitable Identification=20 > value to use in resulting IPv4 fragments. Note that this means the > payload may have to be reduced to 1232 octets (1280=20 > minus 40 for the IPv6 header and 8 for the Fragment header), and smaller > still if additional extension headers are used. Which just mean that 6man needs to extend the IPv6 socket API so that the insertion of a fragment header can be signaled. Or IPV6_USE_MIN_MTU=1 needs to imply that a fragment header needs to be added to packets that are not fragmented. Currently IPV6_USE_MIN_MTU doesn't quite fully disable PMTUD. RFC 3542 allows you to turn off adding the adding of Fragment headr by there is no mechanism to force the adding of a Fragment header. > /Stephan > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dnsext-bounces@ietf.org] On > > Behalf Of Mark Andrews > > Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 6:02 PM > > To: Paul Hoffman > > Cc: dnsext@ietf.org; Olafur Gudmundsson > > Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-levine-dnsextlang-02 > >=20 > > On a similar matter I was in the process of submitting the following. > > I just needed to address internal comments. I also think my EDNS > > expire option still needs to be addressed though I suspect I'll do > that > > as a individual submission. > >=20 > > Mark > > -- > > Mark Andrews, ISC > > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia > > PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org From jaap@bartok.nlnetlabs.nl Mon Dec 5 01:20:46 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 585E621F863E for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 01:20:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OsxmYPeXMaK2 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 01:20:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from bartok.nlnetlabs.nl (bartok.nlnetlabs.nl [IPv6:2001:7b8:206:1:216:76ff:feb8:3c02]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82B4A21F85F2 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 01:20:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from bartok.nlnetlabs.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bartok.nlnetlabs.nl (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id pB59Kgg4069557 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 10:20:42 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from jaap@bartok.nlnetlabs.nl) Message-Id: <201112050920.pB59Kgg4069557@bartok.nlnetlabs.nl> To: DNSEXT Working Group In-reply-to: References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <002301ccb1bc$d6c84980$ca01a8c0@computer> <7E643BE4-8E59-4C1A-B8EC-7EC430DD2A51@vpnc.org> Comments: In-reply-to Edward Lewis message dated "Sat, 03 Dec 2011 13:19:48 -0500." Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 10:20:42 +0100 From: Jaap Akkerhuis X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (bartok.nlnetlabs.nl [127.0.0.1]); Mon, 05 Dec 2011 10:20:42 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 09:20:46 -0000 What I have dealt with most recently is the deviation of implementations from the as-written specifications. In operations, there is no perceived problem, the protocol chunks along, there's a huge industry based on it. It's even created a large market for intangible assets - to put that mildly. Yet the documents have not kept pace. If there's work to do, it's not engineering, it's document clean up. There seems little appetite for that, which bodes poorly for a working group, especially one consisting of volunteers. The last document I worked was AXFR-"clarify" and I didn't even finish it because of what I perceived to be general apathy. The document was needed, and carried to the finish by Alfred, but I didn't see much of a "group" effort to work on it. Since a lot of the tweaking also comes from actually from the operational site (how was X really supposed to work; can we optimize Y; etc.) maybe some if not most of the left-overs can be moved to the dnsops group? Or is that WG also going to retire). Questions I have: Will the mail list continue? If so, how will current non-subscribers learn of the list? There is the usual non-WG list page and there are actually other lists (such as OARC related lists) where one see DNS discussion popping up. Then referral to the namedroppers and or dnsops make take place. Who will be the focal point for questions from other WGs about DNS? Given the discussion I noticed, there is a guild of the black helicopter pilots :-). Are all instructions to IANA complete and understood? Hard to answer, are they ever? jaap From ajs@anvilwalrusden.com Mon Dec 5 04:36:56 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B92C921F8B2F for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 04:36:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.481 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.481 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.118, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0YWkbFjLbPRt for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 04:36:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D414E21F8B26 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 04:36:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from shinkuro.com (69-196-144-227.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.144.227]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A23B01ECB41C for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 12:36:38 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 07:36:52 -0500 From: Andrew Sullivan To: dnsext@ietf.org Message-ID: <20111205123652.GE84440@shinkuro.com> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <002301ccb1bc$d6c84980$ca01a8c0@computer> <7E643BE4-8E59-4C1A-B8EC-7EC430DD2A51@vpnc.org> 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) Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 12:36:56 -0000 Dear colleagues, On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 01:19:48PM -0500, Edward Lewis wrote: > However, the WG really hasn't > shown much in the way of progress, even when viewed over the long > haul. DNSEXT was formed in about 1999, with the conclusion of two > other DNS related WGs. In the 12 year run how many documents made > it to Full Standard or even Draft Standard? (Not very many.) > If there's work to do, it's not engineering, it's document clean up. > There seems little appetite for that, which bodes poorly for a > working group, especially one consisting of volunteers. Speaking only personally, I think the above two observations by Ed are the key: the WG has not worked very hard to complete documents that are in train, and the main job at this point is document clean-up. We could go further and note that the last big push in the WG was to get DNSSEC -- a real extension -- done. It would not be hard to argue that the WG should properly have been wound down then, and we didn't do it. With my co-chair hat on but without having discussed this with Olafur, I will say that, when asked by our AD about this in the recent past, it has been my view that the WG does not want to tackle those document clean-up matters, and that if we want a WG that has as its main task something for the DNS that was roughly like YAM, we should charter a new WG for that. Chartering such a WG would be an opportunity to guage whether there is real interest in doing the work (for, to begin with, we'd need some Internet Drafts to discuss during a chartering discussion). DNSEXT actually made an effort to undertake this documentation work, and it didn't go anywhere: volunteers just didn't want to work on that topic. People all seemed to agree that it was important _someone_ do it, but none of them had the time, the expertise, or both. > Will the mail list continue? I see no reason for it not to. > If so, how will current non-subscribers learn of the list? Apart from the IETF list of such lists, I suppose informally. > Who will be the focal point for questions from other WGs about DNS? No hat, personal opinion: I am not sure DNSEXT is any more anyway. There is a basic problem that DNSEXT doesn't do review: not of its own documents, and not of others' documents either. DNS64 got hardly any review by people who really knew the DNS, even though some of us asked repeatedly for such reviews. A review came from the DNS Directorate at the very last minute; it uncovered several serious issues with the document. MIF recently did a WGLC that was echoed in DNSEXT, and while there was a lot of discussion on the list, there were not that many complete reviews that I saw come from here. There was a great deal of discussion about whether MIF's starting premise was one we wanted to accept, but that did not seem to me to extend so far as to reading the document and suggesting text changes that would say, "This is a bad idea, but if you are determined to do it. . . " Moreover, if we think that there are issues in other WGs that need DNS clue, we can do that by participating in those other WGs. > Are all instructions to IANA complete and understood? Hat back on. No. One of the major problems we in fact have has to do with RRTYPE code point assignment, which is (from IANA's point of view) broken, and which also does not happen according to the published process. I believe that needs to be fixed. I would like to say I think we can do it by the spring, but history does not make me optimistic. Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com From mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp Mon Dec 5 05:29:31 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8791821F8B7C for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 05:29:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.005 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.005 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.095, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eDsWxga-9nXG for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 05:29:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C4A3721F8B61 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 05:29:30 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 9592 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2011 14:02:34 -0000 Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 5 Dec 2011 14:02:34 -0000 Message-ID: <4EDCC713.2030200@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 22:28:51 +0900 From: Masataka Ohta User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dnsext@ietf.org References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <002301ccb1bc$d6c84980$ca01a8c0@computer> <7E643BE4-8E59-4C1A-B8EC-7EC430DD2A51@vpnc.org> <20111205123652.GE84440@shinkuro.com> In-Reply-To: <20111205123652.GE84440@shinkuro.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 13:29:31 -0000 Andrew Sullivan wrote: > Edward Lewis wrote: >> However, the WG really hasn't >> shown much in the way of progress, even when viewed over the long >> haul. DNSEXT was formed in about 1999, with the conclusion of two >> other DNS related WGs. In the 12 year run how many documents made >> it to Full Standard or even Draft Standard? (Not very many.) > Speaking only personally, I think the above two observations by Ed are > the key: Isn't it a well known problem of IETF standardization process to require irrational amount of effort to advance PS to DS and DS to IS? > We > could go further and note that the last big push in the WG was to get > DNSSEC -- a real extension -- done. DNSSEC is a real extension? You should be joking. Masataka Ohta From suzworldwide@gmail.com Mon Dec 5 06:21:34 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A786F21F8C04 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 06:21:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VOikhDZ-WHCg for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 06:21:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-gy0-f194.google.com (mail-gy0-f194.google.com [209.85.160.194]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2222D21F8BF4 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 06:21:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by ghrr16 with SMTP id r16so1345120ghr.1 for ; Mon, 05 Dec 2011 06:21:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=KXNm1rYy4w3LDPBwfLaQ0rYsrD3v/o91JldgSlj7c/g=; b=K2fM4u3hQFBF38TeHvEZq6LJFVfdiTenipo8YAEcxtRQWEcEk3N5TXChqP7ziey9nG urN971BhfPP10hF6eygL/iLx0boXb+f5kCYYbFVnNR8Llq/quqkdzyOQS9HdHxhRz9gx NsD/mQfKnx+UUeNheqx1sN7POhuAWpIq/5xgE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.22.136 with SMTP id t8mr12022101yht.30.1323094892504; Mon, 05 Dec 2011 06:21:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.100.132.15 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 06:21:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20111202214204.GY61329@shinkuro.com> References: <4EC4D950.2020501@ogud.com> <20111202214204.GY61329@shinkuro.com> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 09:21:32 -0500 Message-ID: From: Suzanne Woolf To: Andrew Sullivan Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f50338612672404b3590908 Cc: dnsext-ads@tools.ietf.org, dnsext-chairs chairs , dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] Plan to wrap up the Working Group X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 14:21:34 -0000 --e89a8f50338612672404b3590908 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > > The chairs have been asked by the AD's to prepare the working group > for closing early next year. > > > Note that this removes the aliasing work from the work plan. The > draft is currently expired, and there was not general agreement about > whether to wait on input from the current ICANN work on variants at > the TLD (but apparently we did wait). Since ICANN's project is not > scheduled to complete before February of 2012, we can't realistically > expect to complete a requirements document before March. So we are > planning not to complete that work item. It is not clear whether a WG > that is closing with unfinished business needs to recharter as a > formal step, but our AD hasn't suggested that we need to. > > FWIW, I'm still willing to work on wrapping up this item, if only because there's a document that needs to be written for certain external audiences whether it's an RFC or not. However, I don't think it should stand in the way of concluding DNSEXT. Suzanne --e89a8f50338612672404b3590908 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Andrew S= ullivan <ajs= @anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:

FWIW, I'm still wi= lling to work on wrapping up this item, if only because there's a docum= ent that needs to be written for certain external audiences whether it'= s an RFC or not.

However, I don't think it should stand in the way of concluding DNS= EXT.


Suzanne
--e89a8f50338612672404b3590908-- From ajs@anvilwalrusden.com Mon Dec 5 07:02:47 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB54E21F8BB1 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 07:02:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.486 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.486 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.113, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lqagZqKaj-Ys for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 07:02:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7158A21F8B50 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 07:02:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from shinkuro.com (69-196-144-227.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.144.227]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DA38F1ECB41C for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 15:02:29 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 10:02:44 -0500 From: Andrew Sullivan To: dnsext@ietf.org Message-ID: <20111205150243.GH84440@shinkuro.com> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <002301ccb1bc$d6c84980$ca01a8c0@computer> <7E643BE4-8E59-4C1A-B8EC-7EC430DD2A51@vpnc.org> <20111205123652.GE84440@shinkuro.com> <4EDCC713.2030200@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4EDCC713.2030200@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 15:02:48 -0000 On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 10:28:51PM +0900, Masataka Ohta wrote: > Isn't it a well known problem of IETF standardization process > to require irrational amount of effort to advance PS to DS and > DS to IS? It would indeed require a great deal of effort now, since that advancement path is no longer open. > DNSSEC is a real extension? You should be joking. Regardless of what one thinks of the merits of DNSSEC, it was in fact a change to the protocol and in that sense an extension of capabilities. Other things we have been working on are actually document cleanup or maintenance of existing capabilities (like adding new EDNS0 options or new algorithms to DNSSEC). Best, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com From sm@resistor.net Mon Dec 5 07:07:54 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 472F621F8B70 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 07:07:54 -0800 (PST) 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=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6d9l0vA8O80T for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 07:07:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4024C21F8B50 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 07:07:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.4/8.14.5) with ESMTP id pB5F7f65024365 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 07:07:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1323097669; bh=1Eh92tVYMyWLwsDreC0PVhKlGq8500OZh4fafT1QJ/A=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=QoQEJiwETF/Uo3RNtFPHo0SEXrKaYgkuxvB/w26TiYOBIf8tP2xkXA+DO4Rnjq147 XCLUe7cE4Uokwp3BffhxG39yCaATW/hdB7/N1X8JpVurg1XQaanl7WdHjIoUIKKrmm kyE9O0rMw4e1bztOCN2Y1X8q0zLT/0XKK38Ayx+c= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1323097669; bh=1Eh92tVYMyWLwsDreC0PVhKlGq8500OZh4fafT1QJ/A=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=y1m4QeIHi6zaSNk8chRTcoDmyubKr7/xHts7W5yLOL7+vNV3ativ5EkNEJw2J6qvV UbvnmNig8gg/ePCqD0U42TDINOzYznZv4S/P1PLxynl/nYcjIxC6xEMaUFU1WRwXxS RlIAkvaYE92bm/CGZ6wE88CAagzPWk224bTxf5E8= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20111205060349.0642ff68@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 06:42:52 -0800 To: dnsext@ietf.org From: SM In-Reply-To: <20111205123652.GE84440@shinkuro.com> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <002301ccb1bc$d6c84980$ca01a8c0@computer> <7E643BE4-8E59-4C1A-B8EC-7EC430DD2A51@vpnc.org> <20111205123652.GE84440@shinkuro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 15:07:54 -0000 At 04:36 05-12-2011, Andrew Sullivan wrote: >Speaking only personally, I think the above two observations by Ed are >the key: the WG has not worked very hard to complete documents that As a data point: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-registry-fixes-00 Oct 2009 draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2672bis-dname-00 Sep 2006 draft-ietf-dnsext-5395bis-00 Nov 2010 (published Mar 2011) draft-ietf-dnsext-axfr-clarify-00 Mar 2000 (published Jun 2010) draft-ietf-dnsext-dns-tcp-requirements-00 Oct 2009 (published Aug 2010) draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-alg-allocation-00 Sep 2009 (published Nov 2010) draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost-00 Sep 2009 (published Jul 2010) draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-bis-updates-00 May 2005 draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-signal-00 Nov 2010 draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2671bis-edns0-00 Dec 2007 And for DNSOP: draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-ops-00 Feb 2007 (published Jul 2011) draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-under-attack-help-help-00 Feb 2007 (published Jul 2011) draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-00 Jul 2006 (published Jul 2011) draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-dps-framework-00 Nov 2009 draft-ietf-dnsop-respsize-00 Jun 2003 draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc4641bis-00 Mar 2009 Regards, -sm From bmanning@karoshi.com Mon Dec 5 08:29:41 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D78F21F8C4F for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:29:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Af8EwNRrseDZ for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:29:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from vacation.karoshi.com (vacation.karoshi.com [198.32.6.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0449421F8C14 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:29:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from karoshi.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by vacation.karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id pB5GTSFa000921; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:29:34 GMT Received: (from bmanning@localhost) by karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id pB5GTSrD000920; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:29:28 GMT Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:29:28 +0000 From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com To: SM Message-ID: <20111205162928.GA31566@vacation.karoshi.com.> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> <6.2.5.6.2.20111203221451.0aa59360@resistor.net> <20111204212442.GB29945@vacation.karoshi.com.> <6.2.5.6.2.20111204152439.0976f8f8@resistor.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20111204152439.0976f8f8@resistor.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Cc: DNSEXT Group Working Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 16:29:41 -0000 On Sun, Dec 04, 2011 at 03:35:36PM -0800, SM wrote: > At 13:24 04-12-2011, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: > > care to answer the second part of the first question and > >then the second question? > > I don't know the answer to those questions. > > Regards, > -sm then leaving a directorate intact seems unwise, imho. /bill From rdroms@cisco.com Mon Dec 5 08:31:04 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A2EC21F8C4F for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:31:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6HjB9UpQDpcz for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:31:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 843B321F8C4B for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:31:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=rdroms@cisco.com; l=1884; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1323102663; x=1324312263; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=1pIuxDVoaxZZvEokmc27PeUtM2Ka3fucX+TF7btK/Q8=; b=Oz5M4+d4gVoRl8pkLHvP2qLM0jzxF0ote3EqvRlZHZW5DqWIszYCzw+A tcoz0UcRAKCG66iOAa+a21ARZnT9z1u/FZ+/hHcvB/L5k6QEiGXWVipl3 vqbDChp3Sk0HilEdhZ9mLa5ryxF2EuafXc/suO+gPybzdN4dNRO5amtR/ 8=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Al8GAPrw3E6rRDoJ/2dsb2JhbABEqGaBV4EFgXIBAQEDAQEBAQ8BJzQQCwsYLicwBhMJGYdlCJZGAZ47ij5jBIgtjC+FR4xv X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,299,1320624000"; d="scan'208";a="17826450" Received: from mtv-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.58.9]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Dec 2011 16:31:03 +0000 Received: from [161.44.65.173] ([161.44.65.173]) by mtv-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pB5GV2rX016897 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:31:03 GMT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) From: Ralph Droms In-Reply-To: <20111205033509.GC84440@shinkuro.com> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 11:31:04 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> <20111204232556.GA30268@vacation.karoshi.com.> <7A0435E4-C0D0-4D0B-A6C0-B2704B8AFFC3@rfc1035.com> <20111205023930.GA30651@vacation.karoshi.com.> <20111205033509.GC84440@shinkuro.com> To: DNSEXT Working Group X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Subject: Re: [dnsext] the DNS Directorate and the end of dnsext X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 16:31:04 -0000 On Dec 4, 2011, at 10:35 PM 12/4/11, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 02:39:30AM +0000, = bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: >=20 >> actually, it kind of does - the directorate came into existance = to=20 >> support dnsext >=20 > As far as I understand the purpose of directorates, they are designed > to provide support for ADs, and not for WGs. My understanding of the > DNS Directorate and its structure conforms to that. The description of the directorate at = http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/dns.html is accurate and current. = It describes the Directorate as advisory, giving input to the OPS and = INT Ads rather than being tied to any specific WGs. As a practical = matter, I depend on the Directorate as advisory, as described in the 5 = bullets on the web page. Archives of dns-dir are publicly available at = http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dns-dir/current/maillist.html > The Directorate's composition will, I suppose, perhaps need > adjustment, because two of its members (Olafur and me) will disappear: > our roles are ex-officio, and in the event there's no office, there's > no office to be out of. OK, we should open a discussion about updating the membership. > In any case, >=20 >> as long as they are tied together - then they will get mentioned=20= >> together. >=20 > they are plainly not tied together. For instance, the DNS Directorate > also serves the OPS ADs, and the chairs of DNSOP are ex-officio > members too. Andrew has it right - the Directorate is advisory to OPS and INT ADs, = rather than being tied to any specific WG. - Ralph >=20 > Best, >=20 > A >=20 > --=20 > Andrew Sullivan > ajs@anvilwalrusden.com > _______________________________________________ > dnsext mailing list > dnsext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext From rdroms@cisco.com Mon Dec 5 08:38:54 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 307AD21F8BDC for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:38:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FT02xPB2e-vC for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:38:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtv-iport-1.cisco.com (mtv-iport-1.cisco.com [173.36.130.12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7858621F8BD7 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:38:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=rdroms@cisco.com; l=3306; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1323103133; x=1324312733; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=YP8zMKCWNHrTvct/VOwqIeN1ptiGa8SoqSZBn3yNXuU=; b=nIpVItuAgqkNUDy0OrpjbP5a1snVgT0M+pD75AnSKmV7iAzpoycjy1cN ThrlAPQTVKJ39ioKD+2j0N76R0v8GWLhBxtN01WNeb7JgGTmD5ETVhCAu o399SGmDW6xHevglpB8ZsySfKuU+XCUNvNP0SxEk3eHod0qUWAvVdRKjn c=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EAKry3E6rRDoI/2dsb2JhbABEqj2BBYFyAQEBAwEBAQEPAScxAwsQCxguJzAZCQsOh2UIlkoBnjyKPmMEiC2ML4VHjG8 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,299,1320624000"; d="scan'208";a="16113451" Received: from mtv-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.58.8]) by mtv-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Dec 2011 16:38:53 +0000 Received: from [161.44.65.173] ([161.44.65.173]) by mtv-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pB5GcqSf029415; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:38:52 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ralph Droms In-Reply-To: <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 11:38:54 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> To: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Cc: DNSEXT Group Working Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 16:38:54 -0000 On Dec 4, 2011, at 12:52 AM 12/4/11, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com = wrote: >=20 > Ralph,=20 >=20 > wrt the "DNS Directorate" - if it is to remain, it would be = useful to know > who is on it, and why. What are the qualifications for = joining/removal? > There are quire a few people qho are highly qualified DNS folks = who are > not part of said directorate and it would be questionable to = leaave such=20 > a censure board intact w/o due process. I would argue that if = the WG is being > disband, so should the rest of the support heirarchy, save the = mailing list, > which is open to anyone. YMMV of course, but I think leaving a = directorate > intact, unaccountable to the community, is a -really bad idea-. >=20 > /bill Bill - I disgaree with your premise that the Directorate is a "censure = board". The description of the mission of the Directorate at = http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/dns.html is consistent with current = practice. The Directorate is entirely advisory and in support of the = IESG rather than any specific working group. - Ralph >=20 > On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 06:48:45PM -0500, Ralph Droms wrote: >> I recognize that DNS is a core Internet technology and I appreciate = the contributions of the WG to that technology over the years. At = present, it appears that the last new work was taken on the WG almost = two years ago, and the remaining charter items Olafur listed in his = announcement have been in process for at least two years. Based on that = level of activity and lack of new work in the WG queue, it seems to me = to be appropriate to wrap up the final charter items and close down the = WG. >>=20 >> Thanks to Ed Lewis for asking a few salient questions. We will keep = the dnsext mailing list open to provide a forum for future discussion of = dnsext issues. I would appreciate any recommendations on how to promote = awareness of the dnsext mailing list. The DNS Directorate will also = continue to provide expertise, advice to other WGs and review of IETF = documents. If some issue or issues rise to the level of IETF action, = e.g., the work on aliasing, we will consider chartering a single-topic = WG focused on that issue. =20 >>=20 >> Ed: Can you say more about your last question? >>=20 >> Are all instructions to IANA complete and understood? >>=20 >> - Ralph >>=20 >> On Dec 2, 2011, at 5:43 PM 12/2/11, Doug Barton wrote: >>=20 >>> On 12/02/2011 13:39, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote: >>>> The chairs have been asked by the AD's to prepare the working group >>>> for closing early next year. >>>=20 >>> Suppressing my initial (not family-friendly) response, can I simply = ask, >>> "Why?" >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> --=20 >>>=20 >>> "We could put the whole Internet into a book." >>> "Too practical." >>>=20 >>> Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. >>> Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/ >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> dnsext mailing list >>> dnsext@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> dnsext mailing list >> dnsext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext From Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz Mon Dec 5 08:41:07 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8624F21F8C21 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:41:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QPBlzRzJZ-pd for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:41:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from stora.ogud.com (stora.ogud.com [66.92.146.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A60A821F8C22 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:41:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from work-laptop-2 (nyttbox.md.ogud.com [10.20.30.4]) by stora.ogud.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pB5Gf3gK012575; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 11:41:03 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz) Received: from [10.31.200.139] by work-laptop-2 (PGP Universal service); Mon, 05 Dec 2011 11:41:03 -0500 X-PGP-Universal: processed; by work-laptop-2 on Mon, 05 Dec 2011 11:41:03 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20111205123652.GE84440@shinkuro.com> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <002301ccb1bc$d6c84980$ca01a8c0@computer> <7E643BE4-8E59-4C1A-B8EC-7EC430DD2A51@vpnc.org> <20111205123652.GE84440@shinkuro.com> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 11:40:29 -0500 To: Andrew Sullivan From: Edward Lewis Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 10.20.30.4 Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 16:41:07 -0000 Ralph, I think Andrew answered the question here. When I wrote my message in the back of my mind was the same issue, I just couldn't firm it up. I ran into this when I tried to get "The Undocumented Types" document going. At 18:48 -0500 12/3/11, Ralph Droms wrote: >Ed: Can you say more about your last question? > > Are all instructions to IANA complete and understood? At 7:36 -0500 12/5/11, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > >Hat back on. No. One of the major problems we in fact have has to do >with RRTYPE code point assignment, which is (from IANA's point of >view) broken, and which also does not happen according to the >published process. I believe that needs to be fixed. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext/current/msg11774.html is a comment that reflects that all is not well. -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis NeuStar You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468 Vote for the word of the day: "Papa"razzi - father that constantly takes photos of the baby Corpureaucracy - The institution of corporate "red tape" From rdroms@cisco.com Mon Dec 5 08:48:25 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCCB021F8B25 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:48:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.698, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CsKGCMlSeht8 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:48:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtv-iport-1.cisco.com (mtv-iport-1.cisco.com [173.36.130.12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C1E321F8B0B for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:48:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=rdroms@cisco.com; l=1565; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1323103705; x=1324313305; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=BJOjQwAIiik4DvFP0f4g9r77rg0FvT7EiEPC2N9dwqc=; b=fNatbLMQ2GE/0Vd+noH6fHvOtgpJyEBTzhCD5c0PBnJiXFkk9jVtRnXk vndGvbi0m8ALNzLs1KxS7qE336ImaDPsHkfgwhmakCaW2sCxXFDNfV7ZY He7E3jELBSH8blqNF9NzIjSJcOVo3YMdeF5FdlLJPcoLHFdB+XAdZFS+6 M=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,299,1320624000"; d="scan'208";a="16115471" Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by mtv-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Dec 2011 16:48:25 +0000 Received: from [161.44.65.173] ([161.44.65.173]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pB5GmNJt028630; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:48:23 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ralph Droms In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 11:48:25 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9C4853BD-08D0-437C-9795-ED65D727C901@cisco.com> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <002301ccb1bc$d6c84980$ca01a8c0@computer> <7E643BE4-8E59-4C1A-B8EC-7EC430DD2A51@vpnc.org> <20111205123652.GE84440@shinkuro.com> To: Edward Lewis X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 16:48:25 -0000 On Dec 5, 2011, at 11:40 AM 12/5/11, Edward Lewis wrote: > Ralph, >=20 > I think Andrew answered the question here. When I wrote my message in = the back of my mind was the same issue, I just couldn't firm it up. I = ran into this when I tried to get "The Undocumented Types" document = going. OK, thanks for the clarification. - Ralph >=20 > At 18:48 -0500 12/3/11, Ralph Droms wrote: >> Ed: Can you say more about your last question? >>=20 >> Are all instructions to IANA complete and understood? >=20 > At 7:36 -0500 12/5/11, Andrew Sullivan wrote: >>=20 >> Hat back on. No. One of the major problems we in fact have has to = do >> with RRTYPE code point assignment, which is (from IANA's point of >> view) broken, and which also does not happen according to the >> published process. I believe that needs to be fixed. >=20 > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext/current/msg11774.html is a = comment that reflects that all is not well. >=20 > --=20 > = -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D= -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D- > Edward Lewis > NeuStar You can leave a voice message at = +1-571-434-5468 >=20 > Vote for the word of the day: > "Papa"razzi - father that constantly takes photos of the baby > Corpureaucracy - The institution of corporate "red tape" > _______________________________________________ > dnsext mailing list > dnsext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext From bmanning@karoshi.com Mon Dec 5 08:49:24 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47F8D21F8C0D for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:49:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W62pkB53gNDU for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:49:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from vacation.karoshi.com (vacation.karoshi.com [198.32.6.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1C0A21F8BF3 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:49:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from karoshi.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by vacation.karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id pB5Gn4Fa001009; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:49:09 GMT Received: (from bmanning@localhost) by karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id pB5Gmxvf001008; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:48:59 GMT Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:48:58 +0000 From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com To: Ralph Droms Message-ID: <20111205164858.GC31566@vacation.karoshi.com.> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Cc: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com, DNSEXT Group Working Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 16:49:24 -0000 On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 11:38:54AM -0500, Ralph Droms wrote: > > On Dec 4, 2011, at 12:52 AM 12/4/11, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: > > > > > Ralph, > > > > wrt the "DNS Directorate" - if it is to remain, it would be useful to know > > who is on it, and why. What are the qualifications for joining/removal? > > There are quire a few people qho are highly qualified DNS folks who are > > not part of said directorate and it would be questionable to leaave such > > a censure board intact w/o due process. I would argue that if the WG is being > > disband, so should the rest of the support heirarchy, save the mailing list, > > which is open to anyone. YMMV of course, but I think leaving a directorate > > intact, unaccountable to the community, is a -really bad idea-. > > > > /bill > > Bill - I disgaree with your premise that the Directorate is a "censure board". The description of the mission of the Directorate at http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/dns.html is consistent with current practice. The Directorate is entirely advisory and in support of the IESG rather than any specific working group. > > - Ralph > > > > >> Thanks to Ed Lewis for asking a few salient questions. We will keep the dnsext mailing list open to provide a forum for future discussion of dnsext issues. I would appreciate any recommendations on how to promote awareness of the dnsext mailing list. The DNS Directorate will also continue to provide expertise, advice to other WGs and review of IETF documents. If some issue or issues rise to the level of IETF action, e.g., the work on aliasing, we will consider chartering a single-topic WG focused on that issue. > >> thanks for the clarifing mail. Since the DNS directorate is advisory tothe OPS and INT ADs and is not tied to any specific WG, I think the comments wrt a censure board are accurate. Your statement ".. will also continue to provide expertise, advice and review..." sounds like just such a body, absent a WG to provide balance to IESG/AD rule making. Sounds like neither of us is swayed from our respective positions wrt the ongoing existance of a Directorate. However on the demise of DNSEXT, I think the schedule is acheiveable and worthwhile. /bill From msk@cloudmark.com Tue Dec 6 13:55:06 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7954D21F8B10 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:55:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.624 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.624 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.025, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vITB1DGZFcRU for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:55:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 826B121F84B1 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:55:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from spite.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.72) by EXCH-HTCAS901.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:54:59 -0800 Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by spite.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.72]) with mapi; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:54:59 -0800 From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" To: "dnsext@ietf.org" Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:54:58 -0800 Thread-Topic: [dnsext] the DNS Directorate and the end of dnsext Thread-Index: Acyy/ufgp/TGdWJZQCCHi9ZlyW0QDQBYrgpw Message-ID: References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> <20111204232556.GA30268@vacation.karoshi.com.> <7A0435E4-C0D0-4D0B-A6C0-B2704B8AFFC3@rfc1035.com> <20111205023930.GA30651@vacation.karoshi.com.> <20111205033509.GC84440@shinkuro.com> In-Reply-To: <20111205033509.GC84440@shinkuro.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dnsext] the DNS Directorate and the end of dnsext X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 21:55:06 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dnsext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf = Of Andrew Sullivan > Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 7:35 PM > To: dnsext@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [dnsext] the DNS Directorate and the end of dnsext >=20 > The Directorate's composition will, I suppose, perhaps need adjustment, > because two of its members (Olafur and me) will disappear: > our roles are ex-officio, and in the event there's no office, there's > no office to be out of. You could become regular members, depending on what their rites of passage = for admission are. From marka@isc.org Tue Dec 6 14:19:29 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4627F21F8548 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 14:19:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.585 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.585 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.014, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TguHXZYT7Nnx for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 14:19:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ams1.isc.org (mx.ams1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:500:60::65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA80B21F8545 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 14:19:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from bikeshed.isc.org (bikeshed.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:d::19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "bikeshed.isc.org", Issuer "ISC CA" (verified OK)) by mx.ams1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DA5A5F98AF for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 22:19:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:820:4c56:5549:eccd:a9ae]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 26D6E216C6D for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 22:19:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by drugs.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06FDA1925ECD for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 09:19:11 +1100 (EST) To: dnsext@ietf.org From: Mark Andrews Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 09:19:10 +1100 Message-Id: <20111206221911.06FDA1925ECD@drugs.dv.isc.org> Subject: [dnsext] 3007 vs 4033, 4034 and 4035 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:19:29 -0000 4033, 4034 and 4035 all list 3007 as being updated by them. I see no evidence that any of 4033, 4034 and 4035 actually update 3007. I believe a erratra should be filed. -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org From Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz Wed Dec 7 05:40:16 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44F2521F8BB2 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 05:40:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.724 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.724 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.725, BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UQPeCDO8h2IY for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 05:40:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from stora.ogud.com (stora.ogud.com [66.92.146.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FE9F21F8B9C for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 05:40:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from work-laptop-2 (nyttbox.md.ogud.com [10.20.30.4]) by stora.ogud.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pB7DeCY3030724; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 08:40:14 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz) Received: from [10.31.200.139] by work-laptop-2 (PGP Universal service); Wed, 07 Dec 2011 08:40:15 -0500 X-PGP-Universal: processed; by work-laptop-2 on Wed, 07 Dec 2011 08:40:15 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20111206221911.06FDA1925ECD@drugs.dv.isc.org> References: <20111206221911.06FDA1925ECD@drugs.dv.isc.org> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 08:40:12 -0500 To: From: Edward Lewis Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 10.20.30.4 Cc: ed.lewis@neustar.biz Subject: Re: [dnsext] 3007 vs 4033, 4034 and 4035 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 13:40:16 -0000 Consult this for instructions: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.php At 9:19 +1100 12/7/11, Mark Andrews wrote: >I believe a erratra should be filed. -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis NeuStar You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468 Vote for the word of the day: "Papa"razzi - father that constantly takes photos of the baby Corpureaucracy - The institution of corporate "red tape" From lconroy@insensate.co.uk Wed Dec 7 05:55:22 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B66CF21F8C00 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 05:55:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.150, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7JesqgFwZaQ6 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 05:55:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from insensate.co.uk (ghost.insensate.co.uk [213.152.49.121]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0027021F8BF9 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 05:55:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by insensate.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 594C7290DE3; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 13:55:20 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at insensate.co.uk Received: from insensate.co.uk ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (psyche.insensate.co.uk [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VvfjIs3klLV5; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 13:55:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by insensate.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 954ED290DD8; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 13:55:19 +0000 (GMT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Lawrence Conroy In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 13:55:18 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <3C110754-F1CC-4AD1-A4D1-24889EA2C9EE@insensate.co.uk> References: <20111206221911.06FDA1925ECD@drugs.dv.isc.org> To: Edward Lewis X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] 3007 vs 4033, 4034 and 4035 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 13:55:22 -0000 Hi Ed, folks, C'mon. Play nice. This question is why I'm happy that the Namedroppers list is continuing. I trust that others who might want to raise errata can find this list to sanity check concerns **before** errata are raised. Can't help saying that the potentially inconsistent state of the RFCs is something that the WG should have fixed, and is a challenge [As you know :]p Speaking as an outsider, Mark's question seems reasonable to me. No -- that doesn't need a WG, but Namedroppers IS a public pool of clueful (if grumpy) people with DNS clue. all the best, Lawrence On 7 Dec 2011, at 13:40, Edward Lewis wrote: > Consult this for instructions: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.php > > At 9:19 +1100 12/7/11, Mark Andrews wrote: >> I believe a erratra should be filed. > From ajs@anvilwalrusden.com Wed Dec 7 06:53:20 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8EB821F84A8 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 06:53:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.495 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.104, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NoTSaG-TqXt8 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 06:53:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31B3F21F84A7 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 06:53:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from shinkuro.com (69-196-144-227.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.144.227]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B0BC1ECB420 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 14:53:02 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 09:53:16 -0500 From: Andrew Sullivan To: dnsext@ietf.org Message-ID: <20111207145316.GD1108@shinkuro.com> References: <20111206221911.06FDA1925ECD@drugs.dv.isc.org> <3C110754-F1CC-4AD1-A4D1-24889EA2C9EE@insensate.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3C110754-F1CC-4AD1-A4D1-24889EA2C9EE@insensate.co.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: [dnsext] The list name (was: 3007 vs 4033, 4034 and 4035) X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 14:53:20 -0000 Dear colleagues, On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 01:55:18PM +0000, Lawrence Conroy wrote: > > This question is why I'm happy that the Namedroppers list is continuing. With my list-moderator hat on, I want to note that this list is not the namedroppers list. The namedroppers list was a list that was operated on ops.ietf.org, which had (and according to a query I just issued, still has) as its MX a machine in psg.com. Some of you may remember that we attempted to move that list onto the ietf.org infrastructure, and were not able to do so. This was partly because one of the people behind the operation of the list in its old home were opposed to such a move and were unwilling to co-operate in it. Both of your moderators lost access to administrative operations on that list during that period. Accordingly, the list supporting DNSEXT was changed. I do not know the status of the (old) namedroppers list, although I note that the former archives seem not to work and that the last time I tried to send mail to the former address the mail apparently disappeared. I just want to ensure, for the record, that this is clear, since the current controllers of namedroppers seemed to feel quite strongly that the control of that list should remain with them. The DNSEXT list moderators have no idea whether the namedroppers list is continuing. Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com From sm@resistor.net Wed Dec 7 07:40:04 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18F9221F8C0F for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 07:40:04 -0800 (PST) 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 ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WrodlJNGDBIi for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 07:40:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67BE021F8B54 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 07:40:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.4/8.14.5) with ESMTP id pB7FduXS005293; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 07:39:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1323272400; bh=JBb69UprjhmDA/e8JRPfbd8MVT72PmemXud0SI4oxY8=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=JbCT2HYKHPhCEMYI+JCQ5P8FTERrX5QMJlsaBrtc2cJj1m3fyHwXsWm/P8s2cRLSv TpEhDSHfitBUw3aWTGvUAagz8y9QzVAR6XY0ck+uIEVqMNTWqIlRx894K5F0QdsqCY RyG+vW0oYrFYJJPSPZ0LxPc8DAZAuclbzutd5Ei0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1323272400; bh=JBb69UprjhmDA/e8JRPfbd8MVT72PmemXud0SI4oxY8=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=a84WaMmlKO9vaBZ3S2mYJZFEOsEq6NXfBYY4i4KObWcEe0t6Jmjv4qJ5FFIei5hGf /1apksnw4vQJeivZJOJqnXt8Tqd03W1vH0faoMyIS/6YFmdra7iq37ca9HNDrwY1b+ lAI3+gPjQrobv2jp45vcicf37QHaaLcHY1G5TZFA= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20111207071614.0964a000@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 07:26:46 -0800 To: Mark Andrews From: SM In-Reply-To: <20111206221911.06FDA1925ECD@drugs.dv.isc.org> References: <20111206221911.06FDA1925ECD@drugs.dv.isc.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] 3007 vs 4033, 4034 and 4035 X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 15:40:04 -0000 Hi Mark, At 14:19 06-12-2011, Mark Andrews wrote: >4033, 4034 and 4035 all list 3007 as being updated by them. > >I see no evidence that any of 4033, 4034 and 4035 actually update >3007. There isn't any mention of what parts of RFC 3007 are updated by those RFCs. >I believe a erratra should be filed. See http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/rfc-metadata-errata.html Regards, -sm From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Wed Dec 7 12:41:32 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D811C1F0C50 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:41:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.387 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.387 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.213, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aYrpLOntXF96 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:41:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 745D71F0C3B for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:41:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 12BE5B1E004; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:40:58 -0800 (PST) To: roy.arends@telin.nl, sra@isc.org, mlarson@verisign.com, massey@cs.colostate.edu, scott.rose@nist.gov, rdroms.ietf@gmail.com, jari.arkko@piuha.net, ogud@ogud.com, ajs@anvilwalrusden.com From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20111207204058.12BE5B1E004@rfc-editor.org> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:40:58 -0800 (PST) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 12:52:44 -0800 Cc: dnsext@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [dnsext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4033 (3043) X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 20:41:33 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC4033, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4033&eid=3043 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Mark Andrews Section: Updates Original Text ------------- Updates: 1034, 1035, 2136, 2181, 2308, 3225, M. Larson 3007, 3597, 3226 VeriSign Corrected Text -------------- Updates: 1034, 1035, 2136, 2181, 2308, 3225, M. Larson 3597, 3226 VeriSign Notes ----- RFC 4033, 4034 and 4035 all list 3007 as being updated but none of them update 3007. Instructions: ------------- This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC4033 (draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-intro-13) -------------------------------------- Title : DNS Security Introduction and Requirements Publication Date : March 2005 Author(s) : R. Arends, R. Austein, M. Larson, D. Massey, S. Rose Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : DNS Extensions Area : Internet Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Wed Dec 7 12:47:29 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B25E1F0C5D for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:47:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.396 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.396 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.204, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rhwZVHm5ODEc for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:47:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3D841F0C58 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:47:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id D9224B1E005; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:46:53 -0800 (PST) To: roy.arends@telin.nl, sra@isc.org, mlarson@verisign.com, massey@cs.colostate.edu, scott.rose@nist.gov, rdroms.ietf@gmail.com, jari.arkko@piuha.net, ogud@ogud.com, ajs@anvilwalrusden.com From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20111207204653.D9224B1E005@rfc-editor.org> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:46:53 -0800 (PST) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 12:52:45 -0800 Cc: dnsext@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [dnsext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4035 (3044) X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 20:47:29 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC4035, "Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security Extensions". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4035&eid=3044 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Mark Andrews Section: Updates Original Text ------------- Updates: 1034, 1035, 2136, 2181, 2308, 3225, M. Larson 3007, 3597, 3226 VeriSign Corrected Text -------------- Updates: 1034, 1035, 2136, 2181, 2308, 3225, M. Larson 3597, 3226 VeriSign Notes ----- 4033, 4034 and 4035 all list 3007 as being updated but none update 3007 Instructions: ------------- This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC4035 (draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-protocol-09) -------------------------------------- Title : Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security Extensions Publication Date : March 2005 Author(s) : R. Arends, R. Austein, M. Larson, D. Massey, S. Rose Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : DNS Extensions Area : Internet Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Wed Dec 7 12:50:16 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A19821F8A55 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:50:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.404 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.404 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.196, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q2sJTELpzq1M for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:50:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4E5421F8876 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:50:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 6F8B5B1E005; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:49:41 -0800 (PST) To: roy.arends@telin.nl, sra@isc.org, mlarson@verisign.com, massey@cs.colostate.edu, scott.rose@nist.gov, rdroms.ietf@gmail.com, jari.arkko@piuha.net, ogud@ogud.com, ajs@anvilwalrusden.com From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20111207204941.6F8B5B1E005@rfc-editor.org> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:49:41 -0800 (PST) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 12:52:46 -0800 Cc: dnsext@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [dnsext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4034 (3045) X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 20:50:16 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC4034, "Resource Records for the DNS Security Extensions". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4034&eid=3045 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Mark Andrews Section: Updates Original Text ------------- Updates: 1034, 1035, 2136, 2181, 2308, 3225, M. Larson 3007, 3597, 3226 VeriSign Corrected Text -------------- Updates: 1034, 1035, 2136, 2181, 2308, 3225, M. Larson 3597, 3226 VeriSign Notes ----- 4033, 4034 and 4035 all list 3007 as being updated but none do so. Instructions: ------------- This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC4034 (draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-records-11) -------------------------------------- Title : Resource Records for the DNS Security Extensions Publication Date : March 2005 Author(s) : R. Arends, R. Austein, M. Larson, D. Massey, S. Rose Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : DNS Extensions Area : Internet Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From marka@isc.org Tue Dec 13 21:41:06 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A7861F0C36 for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 21:41:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZV4zPpM+goM7 for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 21:41:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ams1.isc.org (mx.ams1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:500:60::65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1AAC1F0C3B for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 21:41:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from bikeshed.isc.org (bikeshed.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:d::19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "bikeshed.isc.org", Issuer "ISC CA" (verified OK)) by mx.ams1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A52475F98BC for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 05:40:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:820:9dbe:1913:d1c:b98c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A76E6216C70 for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 05:40:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by drugs.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7AA51A08E5C for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 16:40:48 +1100 (EST) To: dnsext@ietf.org From: Mark Andrews Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 16:40:48 +1100 Message-Id: <20111214054048.B7AA51A08E5C@drugs.dv.isc.org> Subject: [dnsext] draft-andrews-dnsext-udp-fragmentation-00.txt X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 05:41:06 -0000 draft-andrews-dnsext-udp-fragmentation-00.txt was formally submitted to the system. Comments requested. -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org From fernando.gont.netbook.win@gmail.com Fri Dec 16 11:59:52 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A629421F8B01 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:59:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.577 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.577 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.022, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=0.044, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PZn1D4hNuXvd for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:59:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A3A021F8AF8 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:59:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by yenm7 with SMTP id m7so3017554yen.31 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:59:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=7JGGGV3v2busGR4M1sAfFewsVzueOLiCQRKye2rdarI=; b=x2PS8yOerY8hAAB1U+TwvEpRSFY/skAZ75QjVNWfT2VsnVcqMZ2nsHO5HjGD6uzDyc anFYwr2JzC8by/CHhE868PL6TWS4Mzyr4CmC0OGhzBrvu2Y47K6iDw6/iAgo/9ELq7/3 E2Zk/OhZ+IhfNGf2pu8oP/GtwBoxdwkbNfe2o= Received: by 10.236.80.4 with SMTP id j4mr13071053yhe.65.1324065591757; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:59:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.123.102] ([190.48.201.157]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a11sm22699339anc.11.2011.12.16.11.59.49 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:59:50 -0800 (PST) Sender: Fernando Gont Message-ID: <4EEB70EC.50702@gont.com.ar> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 13:25:16 -0300 From: Fernando Gont User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110922 Thunderbird/3.1.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dnsext@ietf.org X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [dnsext] Some feedback on draft-andrews-dnsext-udp-fragmentation-00.txt X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 19:59:52 -0000 Mark, Here's some feedback about the aforementioned I-D. ** Technical ** Section 3: > It should be noted that even with IPV6_USE_MIN_MTU set to one that a > PTB message may still be received [RFC 2460] which requires a IPv6 to > add a Fragmentation header to subsequent packets. There is currently > no way to avoid this, without using raw sockets, as there is no way > for a application to request that a Fragmentation header be added to > a packet. I understand that this could (at leasst in theory) happen but, out of curiosity: are there any devices that leverage the aforementioned featuer specified in RFC 2460? NAT 64? Othes? Section 5 (Security Considerations): All these IPv4 issues are discussed in detail in RFC 6274. Also, as noted in my feedback about your other I-D: Relying on fragmentation doesn't come for free, either. In aprticular, if implementation use predictable Fragment IDs (see draft-gont-6man-predictable-fragment-id) fragmentation-related attacks become pretty much feasible. ** Editorial ** Abstract: Expand the Abstract briefly outlining the problem. Section 3: > These include, but are > not limited to, setting the interface the packets are being sent over > should be set to the network MTU (1280 bytes), or restricing DNS/UDP > packets to no more than 1280 bytes including IPv6 headers. This does not parse. You should probably rephrase to "setting the MTU of the interface the packets are being sent over to the minimum IPv6 MTU (1280 bytes)" (Note that I've also s/network MTU/minimum IPv6 MTU/) Section 3: > It should be noted that even with IPV6_USE_MIN_MTU set to one that a > PTB message may still be received [RFC 2460] which requires a IPv6 to > add a Fragmentation header to subsequent packets. There is currently > no way to avoid this, without using raw sockets, as there is no way > for a application to request that a Fragmentation header be added to > a packet. Add a pointer to your other I-D specifying a mechanism to achieve this. ** Nits ** Section 1: > network and no PMTUD was performed. With IPv6 fragmentation occurs > in the sending node and PMTUD is alway performed unless the IPv6 > packet is fragmented by the sending node using the network MTU. s/alway/always/ Section 1: > PMTUD discover Replace with "Path-MTU Discovery". Thanks, -- Fernando Gont e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 From mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp Fri Dec 16 14:03:26 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2691321F84D5 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:03:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.004 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.004 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.094, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PwYKtw3+3HfM for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:03:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 43BE121F84D4 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:03:25 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 39494 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2011 22:39:51 -0000 Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 16 Dec 2011 22:39:51 -0000 Message-ID: <4EEBBFE2.2040106@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 07:02:10 +0900 From: Masataka Ohta User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dnsext@ietf.org References: <20111214054048.B7AA51A08E5C@drugs.dv.isc.org> In-Reply-To: <20111214054048.B7AA51A08E5C@drugs.dv.isc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-andrews-dnsext-udp-fragmentation-00.txt X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 22:03:26 -0000 Mark Andrews wrote: > draft-andrews-dnsext-udp-fragmentation-00.txt was > formally submitted to the system. Comments requested. The following part of the draft: or restricing DNS/UDP packets to no more than 1280 bytes including IPv6 headers. should be or restricting DNS/UDP packets to no more than 1280 bytes including IPv6 and IPv6 extension headers. because, in RFC2460, "IPv6 header" means 40B IP header only. It should also be noted that IPv6 extension headers, some of which, such as fragmentation headers and mobility ones, MUST be inserted without application's discretion, can be (in theory) very long that there is no minimum message size guaranteed to be carried within a 1280B packet. Masataka Ohta From lconroy@insensate.co.uk Fri Dec 16 15:31:24 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 505A41F0C6A for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 15:31:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.024 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.024 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.575, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oiCxMArz31vf for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 15:31:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from insensate.co.uk (ghost.insensate.co.uk [213.152.49.121]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21F641F0C53 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 15:31:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by insensate.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A0732ECFC6; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 23:31:22 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at insensate.co.uk Received: from insensate.co.uk ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (psyche.insensate.co.uk [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 91R4fgHmk0+f; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 23:31:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by insensate.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 657A12ECFBB; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 23:31:21 +0000 (GMT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Lawrence Conroy In-Reply-To: <4EEBBFE2.2040106@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 23:31:20 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <049DBA39-ED02-4D95-A3E8-9778F2C6F8BD@insensate.co.uk> References: <20111214054048.B7AA51A08E5C@drugs.dv.isc.org> <4EEBBFE2.2040106@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> To: Masataka Ohta X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-andrews-dnsext-udp-fragmentation-00.txt X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 23:31:24 -0000 Hi Ohta-san, folks, I note the esteemed ICANN chair's contribution on this topic; RFC 1776. Seriously, someone needs to ship a single doc on fragmentation and its impact on DNS. Frankly, not for people on this list, but for everyone else. all the best, Lawrence On 16 Dec 2011, at 22:02, Masataka Ohta wrote: > Mark Andrews wrote: > >> draft-andrews-dnsext-udp-fragmentation-00.txt was >> formally submitted to the system. Comments requested. > > The following part of the draft: > > or restricing DNS/UDP > packets to no more than 1280 bytes including IPv6 headers. > > should be > > or restricting DNS/UDP > packets to no more than 1280 bytes including IPv6 and > IPv6 extension headers. > > because, in RFC2460, "IPv6 header" means 40B IP header only. > > It should also be noted that IPv6 extension headers, some > of which, such as fragmentation headers and mobility ones, > MUST be inserted without application's discretion, can be > (in theory) very long that there is no minimum message size > guaranteed to be carried within a 1280B packet. > > Masataka Ohta From marka@isc.org Fri Dec 16 16:08:42 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43C1121F853A for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 16:08:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AQXMHYVIJFUf for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 16:08:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ams1.isc.org (mx.ams1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:500:60::65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88A4E21F851F for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 16:08:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from bikeshed.isc.org (bikeshed.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:d::19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "bikeshed.isc.org", Issuer "ISC CA" (verified OK)) by mx.ams1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D50F75F98B1; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 00:08:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:820:4f4:b290:88dd:9a95]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 20C12216C6A; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 00:08:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by drugs.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03D8E1A1A6A7; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 11:08:15 +1100 (EST) To: Fernando Gont From: Mark Andrews References: <4EEB70EC.50702@gont.com.ar> In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 16 Dec 2011 13:25:16 -0300." <4EEB70EC.50702@gont.com.ar> Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 11:08:15 +1100 Message-Id: <20111217000816.03D8E1A1A6A7@drugs.dv.isc.org> Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] Some feedback on draft-andrews-dnsext-udp-fragmentation-00.txt X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 00:08:42 -0000 In message <4EEB70EC.50702@gont.com.ar>, Fernando Gont writes: > Mark, > > Here's some feedback about the aforementioned I-D. Thanks. > Section 3: > > It should be noted that even with IPV6_USE_MIN_MTU set to one that a > > PTB message may still be received [RFC 2460] which requires a IPv6 to > > add a Fragmentation header to subsequent packets. There is currently > > no way to avoid this, without using raw sockets, as there is no way > > for a application to request that a Fragmentation header be added to > > a packet. > > I understand that this could (at leasst in theory) happen but, out of > curiosity: are there any devices that leverage the aforementioned > featuer specified in RFC 2460? NAT 64? Othes? Its been told to me that there are small (<1280) MTU networks that don't fragment and reassembly IPv6 at the link layer. I have no reason to disbelieve this. Instead they depend on this. I have no direct knowledge. I do have direct knowledge of DNS/UDP responses being fragmented at ethernet MTU (by looking at final fragment offsets) rather than 1280 and only the last fragment making it through as a result of a 6in4 link in the path even with repeated queries to the authoritative server. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org From hallam@gmail.com Mon Dec 19 05:56:20 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61BEA21F8B25 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 05:56:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gazpcB8un4wz for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 05:56:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-tul01m020-f172.google.com (mail-tul01m020-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B1B721F8AD2 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 05:56:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by obcuz6 with SMTP id uz6so1967142obc.31 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 05:56:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=5quHV3j3LkxBphgyzUrqykkIiw+mcGV7RAaOJWw33LM=; b=ffyPx+acPXZxI4bJpkHnC247jCSPaVvQokUNKaiiy5YpCQQYbMK6Fg8jD29KYqNjmR xqzTbZpEqGc/uri8s/GHw41p49BzSpVbX/2pppmQkQBR5QO3Q6aUPIGMme+jMkXdeprj RRBIA5PTf/s0ucQaMEXPfgfsK2z0vkONQPlFo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.74.66 with SMTP id r2mr3794163obv.67.1324302979043; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 05:56:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.182.74.136 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 05:56:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <20111204055236.GB19382@vacation.karoshi.com.> <20111204232556.GA30268@vacation.karoshi.com.> <7A0435E4-C0D0-4D0B-A6C0-B2704B8AFFC3@rfc1035.com> <20111205023930.GA30651@vacation.karoshi.com.> <20111205033509.GC84440@shinkuro.com> Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:56:18 -0500 Message-ID: From: Phillip Hallam-Baker To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d044470d1a4100404b472506b Cc: "dnsext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [dnsext] the DNS Directorate and the end of dnsext X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 13:56:20 -0000 --f46d044470d1a4100404b472506b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 The problem with the DNS Directorate arose out of an occasion when it actually was used by a DNSEXT chair to overrule the consensus of the WG. There is history there and no, I will keep bringing it up till I get an apology. The DNS Directorate is the reason that DNSSEC did not deploy in 2002. We already have ICANN, we do not need even more self perpetuating cabals in this space. They are particularly dangerous in the DNS space because there is a de-facto monopoly (ICANN) which is not a technical organization and may well prefer to rely on the DNS Directorate for informal advice and treat it as IETF input. There is not so much of a problem in other parts of the IETF as the IETF has no veto power over progress. If I have a disagreement with the security directorate (say) they have no power to block my protocol (other than pointing out that ROT 13 is maybe not a strong enough cipher for credit card numbers (say)). Directorates are usually vehicles for explaining necessary expertise to other parts of the IETF. In the case of Security this is inevitable. We got into a mess with XML which makes it necessary to have review there as well. If it is still necessary to have a DNS directorate then DNSEXT has not done the job it needs to. On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dnsext-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Andrew Sullivan > > Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 7:35 PM > > To: dnsext@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [dnsext] the DNS Directorate and the end of dnsext > > > > The Directorate's composition will, I suppose, perhaps need adjustment, > > because two of its members (Olafur and me) will disappear: > > our roles are ex-officio, and in the event there's no office, there's > > no office to be out of. > > You could become regular members, depending on what their rites of passage > for admission are. > > _______________________________________________ > dnsext mailing list > dnsext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext > -- Website: http://hallambaker.com/ --f46d044470d1a4100404b472506b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The problem with the DNS Directorate arose out of an occasion when it actua= lly was used by a DNSEXT chair to overrule the consensus of the WG.
There is history there and no, I will keep bringing it up till = I get an apology.=A0

The DNS Directorate is the reason that DNSSEC did not deploy in 2002.


We already have ICANN, we do not nee= d even more self perpetuating cabals in this space. They are particularly d= angerous in the DNS space because there is a de-facto monopoly (ICANN) whic= h is not a technical organization and may well prefer to rely on the DNS Di= rectorate for informal advice and treat it as IETF input.

There is not so much of a problem in other parts of the= IETF as the IETF has no veto power over progress. If I have a disagreement= with the security directorate (say) they have no power to block my protoco= l (other than pointing out that ROT 13 is maybe not a strong enough cipher = for credit card numbers (say)).


Directorates are usually vehicles for explaining ne= cessary expertise to other parts of the IETF. In the case of Security this = is inevitable. We got into a mess with XML which makes it necessary to have= review there as well. If it is still necessary to have a DNS directorate t= hen DNSEXT has not done the job it needs to.



On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 = at 4:54 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy <msk@cloudmark.com> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dnsext-bounces@ietf.o= rg [mailto:dnsext-bounces@ie= tf.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Sullivan
> Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 7:35 PM
> To: dnsext@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [dnsext] the DNS Directorate and the end of dnsext
>
> The Directorate's composition will, I suppose, perhaps need adjust= ment,
> because two of its members (Olafur and me) will disappear:
> our roles are ex-officio, and in the event there's no office, ther= e's
> no office to be out of.

You could become regular members, depending on what their rites of pa= ssage for admission are.

_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext



--
= Website: http://hallambaker.com/
--f46d044470d1a4100404b472506b-- From d3e3e3@gmail.com Mon Dec 19 07:08:42 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AEBD21F8B8B for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 07:08:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.855 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.855 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.745, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TpLXRXAKqBrK for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 07:08:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CB9021F8B89 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 07:08:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by laah2 with SMTP id h2so2460359laa.31 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 07:08:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qyCk6pcMaxgcqr5Uq1T5GZgVY6KA6aid74waBJ4Ds0o=; b=wc2OzE6YDSjg/jaSguJ3sZTxjSvxk6oE0DmrxfdXEMe1750vF/z1z1qNQ97vPcODvm 5IdJxRdwW+ioiY1NIL3U1YGX1Ks9P0ZJpTcqV1m2UVTHMF9Km2PwFFIthQco2DJBya8G uxq9WdrX+QaCCfL6FVE80OnNswI3y/R773m0o= Received: by 10.152.112.103 with SMTP id ip7mr4703620lab.46.1324307309303; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 07:08:29 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.133.228 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 07:08:08 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> From: Donald Eastlake Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:08:08 -0500 Message-ID: To: Olafur Gudmundsson , Andrew Sullivan Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 15:08:42 -0000 Second ping. Thanks, Donald On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Donald Eastlake wrote: > If I recall correctly, there was significant support for > draft-eastlake-dnsext-xnamercode > In fact, looking back, there was a WG Last Call issued on this draft > on April 13th of this year with favorable responses. > > Can this be advanced? > > Thanks, > Donald > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > =A0Donald E. Eastlake 3rd=A0=A0 +1-508-333-2270 (cell) > =A0155 Beaver Street,=A0Milford, MA 01757 USA > =A0d3e3e3@gmail.com > > > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote: >> Dear colleagues, >> >> The chairs have been asked by the AD's to prepare the working group >> for closing early next year. >> >> Before the working group closes we need to complete the drafts that >> are on our charter. >> >> Here is the list of current open milestones: >> =A0Apr 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 RFC3597-bis Unknown RR advanced to IESG for PS >> =A0Jun 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 EDNS0-bis update advanced to IESG >> =A0Aug 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 Algorithm signaling document to IESG >> =A0Oct 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 DNSSEC Errata document to IESG >> =A0Nov 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 Decision about new protocol elements, if any >> =A0Nov 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 Requirements and current state survey document t= o IESG >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0for publication >> =A0Dec 2011 =A0 =A0 =A0 IXFR-only to IESG >> >> As you can see we are far behind schedule thus we propose the >> following milestones >> =A0Dec 2011 =A0DNSSEC-errata document to IESG >> =A0Jan 2012 =A0RFC3597-bis To IESG for standard >> =A0Jan 2012 =A0EDNS0-bis update to IESG >> =A0Feb 2012 =A0IXFR-Only to IESG >> =A0Feb 2012 =A0Algorithm signaling document to IESG >> =A0Mar 2012 =A0Close down Working group >> >> Note that this removes the aliasing work from the work plan. =A0The >> draft is currently expired, and there was not general agreement about >> whether to wait on input from the current ICANN work on variants at >> the TLD (but apparently we did wait). =A0Since ICANN's project is not >> scheduled to complete before February of 2012, we can't realistically >> expect to complete a requirements document before March. =A0So we are >> planning not to complete that work item. =A0It is not clear whether a WG >> that is closing with unfinished business needs to recharter as a >> formal step; we're looking into that, and will return with an answer. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Olafur and Andrew >> _______________________________________________ >> dnsext mailing list >> dnsext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext From yaojk@cnnic.cn Mon Dec 19 19:44:17 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3A2211E80B6 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 19:44:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -100.846 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.846 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mF88Yh5l9pW4 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 19:44:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from cnnic.cn (smtp.cnnic.cn [159.226.7.146]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C52D021F84DD for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 19:44:13 -0800 (PST) X-EYOUMAIL-SMTPAUTH: yaojk@cnnic.cn Received: from unknown127.0.0.1 (HELO lenovo47e041cf) (127.0.0.1) by 127.0.0.1 with SMTP; Tue, 20 Dec 2011 11:44:02 +0800 Message-ID: <9D45A857AEA84523A25488E13CCECCDA@LENOVO47E041CF> From: "Jiankang YAO" To: "Donald Eastlake" , "Olafur Gudmundsson" , "Andrew Sullivan" References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 11:44:01 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 03:44:17 -0000 DQotLS0tLSBPcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlIC0tLS0tIA0KRnJvbTogIkRvbmFsZCBFYXN0bGFrZSIg PGQzZTNlM0BnbWFpbC5jb20+DQpUbzogIk9sYWZ1ciBHdWRtdW5kc3NvbiIgPG9ndWRAb2d1ZC5j b20+OyAiQW5kcmV3IFN1bGxpdmFuIiA8YWpzQHNoaW5rdXJvLmNvbT4NCkNjOiA8ZG5zZXh0QGll dGYub3JnPg0KU2VudDogTW9uZGF5LCBEZWNlbWJlciAxOSwgMjAxMSAxMTowOCBQTQ0KU3ViamVj dDogUmU6IFtkbnNleHRdIEROU0VYVCBjbG9zaW5nIGRvd24gc29vbg0KDQo+U2Vjb25kIHBpbmcu DQo+DQoNCisxDQoNCj5UaGFua3MsDQo+RG9uYWxkDQo+DQpPbiBTdW4sIERlYyA0LCAyMDExIGF0 IDExOjA4IFBNLCBEb25hbGQgRWFzdGxha2UgPGQzZTNlM0BnbWFpbC5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KPiBJ ZiBJIHJlY2FsbCBjb3JyZWN0bHksIHRoZXJlIHdhcyBzaWduaWZpY2FudCBzdXBwb3J0IGZvcg0K PiBkcmFmdC1lYXN0bGFrZS1kbnNleHQteG5hbWVyY29kZQ0KPiBJbiBmYWN0LCBsb29raW5nIGJh Y2ssIHRoZXJlIHdhcyBhIFdHIExhc3QgQ2FsbCBpc3N1ZWQgb24gdGhpcyBkcmFmdA0KPiBvbiBB cHJpbCAxM3RoIG9mIHRoaXMgeWVhciB3aXRoIGZhdm9yYWJsZSByZXNwb25zZXMuDQo+DQo+IENh biB0aGlzIGJlIGFkdmFuY2VkPw0KPg0KPiBUaGFua3MsDQo+IERvbmFsZA0KPiA9PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQ0KPiBEb25hbGQgRS4gRWFzdGxha2UgM3JkICsxLTUwOC0zMzMt MjI3MCAoY2VsbCkNCj4gMTU1IEJlYXZlciBTdHJlZXQsIE1pbGZvcmQsIE1BIDAxNzU3IFVTQQ0K PiBkM2UzZTNAZ21haWwuY29tDQo+DQo+DQo+DQo+IE9uIEZyaSwgRGVjIDIsIDIwMTEgYXQgNDoz OSBQTSwgT2xhZnVyIEd1ZG11bmRzc29uIDxvZ3VkQG9ndWQuY29tPiB3cm90ZToNCj4+IERlYXIg Y29sbGVhZ3VlcywNCj4+DQo+PiBUaGUgY2hhaXJzIGhhdmUgYmVlbiBhc2tlZCBieSB0aGUgQUQn cyB0byBwcmVwYXJlIHRoZSB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwDQo+PiBmb3IgY2xvc2luZyBlYXJseSBuZXh0 IHllYXIuDQo+Pg0KPj4gQmVmb3JlIHRoZSB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIGNsb3NlcyB3ZSBuZWVkIHRv IGNvbXBsZXRlIHRoZSBkcmFmdHMgdGhhdA0KPj4gYXJlIG9uIG91ciBjaGFydGVyLg0KPj4NCj4+ IEhlcmUgaXMgdGhlIGxpc3Qgb2YgY3VycmVudCBvcGVuIG1pbGVzdG9uZXM6DQo+PiBBcHIgMjAx MSBSRkMzNTk3LWJpcyBVbmtub3duIFJSIGFkdmFuY2VkIHRvIElFU0cgZm9yIFBTDQo+PiBKdW4g MjAxMSBFRE5TMC1iaXMgdXBkYXRlIGFkdmFuY2VkIHRvIElFU0cNCj4+IEF1ZyAyMDExIEFsZ29y aXRobSBzaWduYWxpbmcgZG9jdW1lbnQgdG8gSUVTRw0KPj4gT2N0IDIwMTEgRE5TU0VDIEVycmF0 YSBkb2N1bWVudCB0byBJRVNHDQo+PiBOb3YgMjAxMSBEZWNpc2lvbiBhYm91dCBuZXcgcHJvdG9j b2wgZWxlbWVudHMsIGlmIGFueQ0KPj4gTm92IDIwMTEgUmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzIGFuZCBjdXJyZW50 IHN0YXRlIHN1cnZleSBkb2N1bWVudCB0byBJRVNHDQo+PiBmb3IgcHVibGljYXRpb24NCj4+IERl YyAyMDExIElYRlItb25seSB0byBJRVNHDQo+Pg0KPj4gQXMgeW91IGNhbiBzZWUgd2UgYXJlIGZh ciBiZWhpbmQgc2NoZWR1bGUgdGh1cyB3ZSBwcm9wb3NlIHRoZQ0KPj4gZm9sbG93aW5nIG1pbGVz dG9uZXMNCj4+IERlYyAyMDExIEROU1NFQy1lcnJhdGEgZG9jdW1lbnQgdG8gSUVTRw0KPj4gSmFu IDIwMTIgUkZDMzU5Ny1iaXMgVG8gSUVTRyBmb3Igc3RhbmRhcmQNCj4+IEphbiAyMDEyIEVETlMw LWJpcyB1cGRhdGUgdG8gSUVTRw0KPj4gRmViIDIwMTIgSVhGUi1Pbmx5IHRvIElFU0cNCj4+IEZl YiAyMDEyIEFsZ29yaXRobSBzaWduYWxpbmcgZG9jdW1lbnQgdG8gSUVTRw0KPj4gTWFyIDIwMTIg Q2xvc2UgZG93biBXb3JraW5nIGdyb3VwDQo+Pg0KPj4gTm90ZSB0aGF0IHRoaXMgcmVtb3ZlcyB0 aGUgYWxpYXNpbmcgd29yayBmcm9tIHRoZSB3b3JrIHBsYW4uIFRoZQ0KPj4gZHJhZnQgaXMgY3Vy cmVudGx5IGV4cGlyZWQsIGFuZCB0aGVyZSB3YXMgbm90IGdlbmVyYWwgYWdyZWVtZW50IGFib3V0 DQo+PiB3aGV0aGVyIHRvIHdhaXQgb24gaW5wdXQgZnJvbSB0aGUgY3VycmVudCBJQ0FOTiB3b3Jr IG9uIHZhcmlhbnRzIGF0DQo+PiB0aGUgVExEIChidXQgYXBwYXJlbnRseSB3ZSBkaWQgd2FpdCku IFNpbmNlIElDQU5OJ3MgcHJvamVjdCBpcyBub3QNCj4+IHNjaGVkdWxlZCB0byBjb21wbGV0ZSBi ZWZvcmUgRmVicnVhcnkgb2YgMjAxMiwgd2UgY2FuJ3QgcmVhbGlzdGljYWxseQ0KPj4gZXhwZWN0 IHRvIGNvbXBsZXRlIGEgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzIGRvY3VtZW50IGJlZm9yZSBNYXJjaC4gU28gd2Ug YXJlDQo+PiBwbGFubmluZyBub3QgdG8gY29tcGxldGUgdGhhdCB3b3JrIGl0ZW0uIEl0IGlzIG5v dCBjbGVhciB3aGV0aGVyIGEgV0cNCj4+IHRoYXQgaXMgY2xvc2luZyB3aXRoIHVuZmluaXNoZWQg YnVzaW5lc3MgbmVlZHMgdG8gcmVjaGFydGVyIGFzIGENCj4+IGZvcm1hbCBzdGVwOyB3ZSdyZSBs b29raW5nIGludG8gdGhhdCwgYW5kIHdpbGwgcmV0dXJuIHdpdGggYW4gYW5zd2VyLg0KPj4NCj4+ IEJlc3QgcmVnYXJkcywNCj4+DQo+PiBPbGFmdXIgYW5kIEFuZHJldw0KPj4gX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4+IGRuc2V4dCBtYWlsaW5nIGxp c3QNCj4+IGRuc2V4dEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPj4gaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9s aXN0aW5mby9kbnNleHQNCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fDQpkbnNleHQgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQpkbnNleHRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3 LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vZG5zZXh0 From hallam@gmail.com Thu Dec 22 05:16:11 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FCF921F8B45 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:16:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u0MeiFDn60sk for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:16:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-tul01m020-f172.google.com (mail-tul01m020-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 849A521F8B3E for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:16:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by obcuz6 with SMTP id uz6so4700004obc.31 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:16:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=HKN1Cje2qLQXuef0fNnGJVrZGHsbXWEWrZ/0tZPy/jM=; b=SIsq1F3Uxc4aHxnP9hUZljWSpYWda/QkgUDv64SqujI5gmm7o//8pCc+W4w2ICxZsS HbeqUVNIZGAsRxeSOeMmslhtJQhH86fjCEhVFR3oeg58Bwz7t4KRU6NAG7cBh/MoiAca /iIKgz9+ELj6y9pLbErowMSbPnXOfZAQhbKD8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.74.36 with SMTP id q4mr8923976obv.77.1324559769847; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:16:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.182.74.136 with HTTP; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:16:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20111205150243.GH84440@shinkuro.com> References: <4ED94590.3090902@ogud.com> <4ED954A2.8090708@dougbarton.us> <002301ccb1bc$d6c84980$ca01a8c0@computer> <7E643BE4-8E59-4C1A-B8EC-7EC430DD2A51@vpnc.org> <20111205123652.GE84440@shinkuro.com> <4EDCC713.2030200@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <20111205150243.GH84440@shinkuro.com> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 08:16:09 -0500 Message-ID: From: Phillip Hallam-Baker To: Andrew Sullivan Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0444ef2990c86a04b4ae1a24 Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:16:11 -0000 --f46d0444ef2990c86a04b4ae1a24 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Um you are saying that it is now not possible to advance at all? The three step process has been broken for years but it should not be that broken. Working Groups are meant to close down, that is the objective: propose some specs, work on them, shut down. Lingering WGs are bad for many reasons, not least the fact that some of them seem to find more work for the purpose of delaying closure. Often this is work that is simply better not done. This is a particular problem with a group like PKIX which has established a 'brand' in the industry. Some vendors feel they have to send people to PKIX just to block new boondoggles that would be added to the PKIX spec and then be forced to implement. So even though the mission of PKIX is to maintain PKIX, it can't even close obvious errors in the protocol because some people will object on 'principle'. Of course that particular problem is worse due to the $1 billion the US DoD spent on their PKI. DNSEXT was set up to address one particular aspect of DNS infrastructure. Those aspects are done about as well as we can expect. The areas where the DNS needs to be tweaked are the interface between the DNS and the application layer. DNSEXT is not well suited to consider that problem as very few participants in the WG are applications developers. Shutting down DNSEXT provides an opportunity to recruit a new group of participants for an effort focused on the application layer. On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 10:28:51PM +0900, Masataka Ohta wrote: > > > Isn't it a well known problem of IETF standardization process > > to require irrational amount of effort to advance PS to DS and > > DS to IS? > > It would indeed require a great deal of effort now, since that > advancement path is no longer open. > > > DNSSEC is a real extension? You should be joking. > > Regardless of what one thinks of the merits of DNSSEC, it was in fact > a change to the protocol and in that sense an extension of > capabilities. Other things we have been working on are actually > document cleanup or maintenance of existing capabilities (like adding > new EDNS0 options or new algorithms to DNSSEC). > > Best, > > A > > -- > Andrew Sullivan > ajs@anvilwalrusden.com > > > _______________________________________________ > dnsext mailing list > dnsext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext > -- Website: http://hallambaker.com/ --f46d0444ef2990c86a04b4ae1a24 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Um you are saying that it is now not possible to advance at all? The three = step process has been broken for years but it should not be that broken.
Working Groups are meant to close down, that is the object= ive: propose some specs, work on them, shut down.

Lingering WGs are bad for many reasons, not least the f= act that some of them seem to find more work for the purpose of delaying cl= osure. Often this is work that is simply better not done. This is a particu= lar problem with a group like PKIX which has established a 'brand' = in the industry. Some vendors feel they have to send people to PKIX just to= block new boondoggles that would be added to the PKIX spec and then be for= ced to implement. So even though the mission of PKIX is to maintain PKIX, i= t can't even close obvious errors in the protocol because some people w= ill object on 'principle'.

Of course that particular problem is worse due to the $= 1 billion the US DoD spent on their PKI.


DNSEXT was set up to address one particular aspect of DNS infrastruct= ure. Those aspects are done about as well as we can expect.=A0

The areas where the DNS needs to be tweaked are the int= erface between the DNS and the application layer. DNSEXT is not well suited= to consider that problem as very few participants in the WG are applicatio= ns developers. Shutting down DNSEXT provides an opportunity to recruit a ne= w group of participants for an effort focused on the application layer.



On Mon, D= ec 5, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 10= :28:51PM +0900, Masataka Ohta wrote:

> Isn't it a well known problem of IETF standardization process
> to require irrational amount of effort to advance PS to DS and
> DS to IS?

It would indeed require a great deal of effort now, since that
advancement path is no longer open.

> DNSSEC is a real extension? You should be joking.

Regardless of what one thinks of the merits of DNSSEC, it was in fact=
a change to the protocol and in that sense an extension of
capabilities. =A0Other things we have been working on are actually
document cleanup or maintenance of existing capabilities (like adding
new EDNS0 options or new algorithms to DNSSEC).

Best,

A

--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com


_____________________________= __________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext



--
= Website: http://hallambaker.com/
--f46d0444ef2990c86a04b4ae1a24-- From hallam@gmail.com Thu Dec 22 05:20:28 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C9E021F8B8F for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:20:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XDXyUW1XjmMB for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:20:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-gx0-f172.google.com (mail-gx0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A395421F8B8E for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:20:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by ggnk5 with SMTP id k5so7031701ggn.31 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:20:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=W3nVBQZiimDJ88C+0BJgykRB7cldx2bZ+uelk6WFM7Q=; b=MFI5krA6wXukFZC7XVphvHn/TJ2Kra+QRaBZCCVsoAVE6DZIjSBFTJWu6lOBIc3hnt BIBL5rvYi9GZTdW1tHNTGuK2s+ZSahPZu0YlpSWk0cJogCOARGcmn80o7yuoulTPZOZL zP8V2N9kqJx1g63nSv7MAPWw+f788Joz3ZIVY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.88.99 with SMTP id bf3mr8933367obb.73.1324560026817; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:20:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.182.134.70 with HTTP; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:20:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 08:20:26 -0500 Message-ID: From: Phillip Hallam-Baker To: dnsext@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae9399d3be1d3ed04b4ae2949 Subject: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:20:28 -0000 --14dae9399d3be1d3ed04b4ae2949 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 One piece of unfinished business that really should be cleared up before DNSEXT closes is the lack of an IANA registry for SRV prefixes. This is now a big problem because people have been taking maters into their own hands. I did for SAML and XKMS. There are many thousand SRV prefixes in use. They should be recorded 'somewhere'. I can write up a short draft if there is interest. As a practical matter the registry will have to be 'first come first served' for the second tier names at least. Perhaps an expert review for proposals to introduce a new group (_tcp, _udp, _port ... ). The same registry would be shared across all prefixed protocols. -- Website: http://hallambaker.com/ --14dae9399d3be1d3ed04b4ae2949 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable One piece of unfinished business that really should be cleared up before DN= SEXT closes is the lack of an IANA registry for SRV prefixes.

This is now a big problem because people have been taking maters into= their own hands. I did for SAML and XKMS. There are many thousand SRV pref= ixes in use. They should be recorded 'somewhere'.


I can write up a short draft if there is= interest.=A0

As a practical matter the registry w= ill have to be 'first come first served' for the second tier names = at least. Perhaps an expert review for proposals to introduce a new group (= _tcp, _udp, _port ... ).

The same registry would be shared across all prefixed p= rotocols.
--14dae9399d3be1d3ed04b4ae2949-- From Craig.Everhart@netapp.com Thu Dec 22 05:46:31 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1C5521F8B0E for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:46:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ma7uS0do9qIz for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:46:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.netapp.com (mx2.netapp.com [216.240.18.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94BFE21F8B0C for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:46:30 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,393,1320652800"; d="scan'208,217";a="609843238" Received: from smtp2.corp.netapp.com ([10.57.159.114]) by mx2-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 22 Dec 2011 05:46:30 -0800 Received: from sacrsexc2-prd.hq.netapp.com (sacrsexc2-prd.hq.netapp.com [10.99.115.28]) by smtp2.corp.netapp.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/NTAP-1.6) with ESMTP id pBMDkSkv020303; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:46:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from rtprsexc2-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.100.161.115]) by sacrsexc2-prd.hq.netapp.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:46:28 -0800 Received: from RTPMVEXC2-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([10.102.76.150]) by rtprsexc2-prd.hq.netapp.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 22 Dec 2011 08:46:27 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CCC0B0.19B90DBC" Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 08:46:20 -0500 Message-ID: <0F5F2998BC888847BAAC8F8EFB91E8C401904E5F@RTPMVEXC2-PRD.hq.netapp.com> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry Thread-Index: AczArH4qXt8H7PJ0QtKqKPxyMyqe4QAA4Oow References: From: "Everhart, Craig" To: "Phillip Hallam-Baker" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Dec 2011 13:46:27.0097 (UTC) FILETIME=[1A108890:01CCC0B0] Subject: Re: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:46:31 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCC0B0.19B90DBC Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Would it be over and above what's in RFC 6335? =20 From: Phillip Hallam-Baker [mailto:hallam@gmail.com]=20 Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 8:20 AM To: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry =20 One piece of unfinished business that really should be cleared up before DNSEXT closes is the lack of an IANA registry for SRV prefixes. =20 This is now a big problem because people have been taking maters into their own hands. I did for SAML and XKMS. There are many thousand SRV prefixes in use. They should be recorded 'somewhere'. =20 =20 I can write up a short draft if there is interest.=20 =20 As a practical matter the registry will have to be 'first come first served' for the second tier names at least. Perhaps an expert review for proposals to introduce a new group (_tcp, _udp, _port ... ). =20 The same registry would be shared across all prefixed protocols. =20 --=20 Website: http://hallambaker.com/ ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCC0B0.19B90DBC Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Would it be over and above what’s in RFC = 6335?

 

From:= Phillip Hallam-Baker [mailto:hallam@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 8:20 AM
To: dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry

 

One piece of unfinished business that really should = be cleared up before DNSEXT closes is the lack of an IANA registry for SRV prefixes.

 

This is now a big problem because people have been = taking maters into their own hands. I did for SAML and XKMS. There are many = thousand SRV prefixes in use. They should be recorded 'somewhere'.

 

 

I can write up a short draft if there is = interest. 

 

As a practical matter the registry will have to be = 'first come first served' for the second tier names at least. Perhaps an expert = review for proposals to introduce a new group (_tcp, _udp, _port ... = ).

 

The same registry would be shared across all = prefixed protocols.

 

--
Website: http://hallambaker.com/

------_=_NextPart_001_01CCC0B0.19B90DBC-- From johnl@iecc.com Thu Dec 22 14:19:35 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D08A11E809D for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:19:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -107.323 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.323 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=3.876, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x256lF72tj+R for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:19:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [64.57.183.53]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA66A11E8073 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:19:34 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 60870 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2011 22:19:33 -0000 Received: from leila.iecc.com (64.57.183.34) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 22 Dec 2011 22:19:33 -0000 Date: 22 Dec 2011 22:19:11 -0000 Message-ID: <20111222221911.8008.qmail@joyce.lan> From: "John Levine" To: dnsext@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <0F5F2998BC888847BAAC8F8EFB91E8C401904E5F@RTPMVEXC2-PRD.hq.netapp.com> Organization: X-Headerized: yes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 22:19:35 -0000 >Would it be over and above what's in RFC 6335? It might be nice to reserve or otherwise deal with the underscore names used elsewhere in the DNS such as _vouch, _spf, _domainkey, and _adsp. R's, John From paul.hoffman@vpnc.org Thu Dec 22 14:39:43 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F113C11E809F for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:39:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.483 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.483 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.116, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YMN++JuEDS9U for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:39:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8482C11E809D for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:39:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.30.100] (50-0-66-4.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.0.66.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pBMMdcIi049366 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:39:39 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Paul Hoffman In-Reply-To: <20111222221911.8008.qmail@joyce.lan> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:39:38 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <33E4E5A5-FCA8-4918-9B74-A49F16725CD7@vpnc.org> References: <20111222221911.8008.qmail@joyce.lan> To: John Levine X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Cc: dnsext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 22:39:44 -0000 On Dec 22, 2011, at 2:19 PM, John Levine wrote: >> Would it be over and above what's in RFC 6335? >=20 > It might be nice to reserve or otherwise deal with the underscore = names > used elsewhere in the DNS such as _vouch, _spf, _domainkey, and _adsp. That is a topic change. Phill asked about SRV, and Craig correctly = pointed out that Phill's concern is already dealt with in RFC 6335. If = it is not fully dealt with, Phill needs to get section 5 of RFC 6335 = updated. A registry for "underscore names that have been registered" is = completely different. RFC 6335 is "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority = (IANA) Procedures for the Management of the Service Name and Transport = Protocol Port Number Registry": note that that has nothing to do with = "underscore names". If you want a registry for those, start a new = Internet Draft. --Paul Hoffman From msk@cloudmark.com Thu Dec 22 16:44:01 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8400C21F84D6 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:44:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.437 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.162, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NMbiwXmDXkO0 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:44:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D299321F84D5 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:43:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from malice.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.71) by EXCH-HTCAS901.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:43:51 -0800 Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by malice.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.71]) with mapi; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:43:53 -0800 From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" To: Paul Hoffman , John Levine Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:43:53 -0800 Thread-Topic: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry Thread-Index: AczA+pyzb1muhGIKTs6Pe+2sgSH2dwAEULFw Message-ID: References: <20111222221911.8008.qmail@joyce.lan> <33E4E5A5-FCA8-4918-9B74-A49F16725CD7@vpnc.org> In-Reply-To: <33E4E5A5-FCA8-4918-9B74-A49F16725CD7@vpnc.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "dnsext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 00:44:01 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dnsext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf = Of Paul Hoffman > Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 2:40 PM > To: John Levine > Cc: dnsext@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry >=20 > A registry for "underscore names that have been registered" is > completely different. RFC 6335 is "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority > (IANA) Procedures for the Management of the Service Name and Transport > Protocol Port Number Registry": note that that has nothing to do with > "underscore names". If you want a registry for those, start a new > Internet Draft. Willing to help edit/shepherd such a document if needed. -MSK From johnl@iecc.com Thu Dec 22 21:05:04 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF25A11E80EA for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 21:05:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.399, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SKvvFMLX12OW for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 21:05:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1001A11E80E8 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 21:05:03 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 76698 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2011 05:05:02 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:vbr-info:user-agent:cleverness; s=12b99.4ef40bfe.k1112; bh=qYMCntFvIK6C4wi/VTFZui5FI9A4KkWkhL4pCgwh5Hs=; b=l/uQhiCurx/YcJMNkecoGwBsSD8jTSXtQ342A8jIJWyUKfmVCJHy1shAz5rjmx4Ibg02CaZIGuA2KUgaDPYkzqwvP4siOS1E4mTGfn7SEr+ajjYzPJDsPIYm9PQs90Z9t53Nedg9j2208OPXemOWSWWj6w+U8qjb7AP12leBtOc= VBR-Info: md=iecc.com; mc=all; mv=dwl.spamhaus.org Received: (ofmipd 127.0.0.1) with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 23 Dec 2011 05:04:40 -0000 Date: 23 Dec 2011 00:05:01 -0500 Message-ID: From: "John R. Levine" To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" In-Reply-To: References: <20111222221911.8008.qmail@joyce.lan> <33E4E5A5-FCA8-4918-9B74-A49F16725CD7@vpnc.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) Cleverness: None detected MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Cc: "dnsext@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 05:05:04 -0000 >> A registry for "underscore names that have been registered" is >> completely different. ... > Willing to help edit/shepherd such a document if needed. I have an old draft lying around that we can start with. Sec 5.2 of RFC 6335 is the part that says that the service name prefixed by an underscore is the label that goes on a SRV record, and says that "the Service Label MUST be a service name as defined herein with an underscore prepended." But other RFCs such as 3921, 4386, 5509, and 6186 define underscore labels to use as service names in SRV records, some of which don't match service names in the IANA service registry, so if you believe 6335, those names are now invalid, which probably would surprise the people using _pres and _im service labels. I think they're all in other registries, so IANA knows about them, but they're still Service Labels. R's, John From Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk Fri Dec 23 01:55:39 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28DB121F8B32 for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 01:55:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wPt2ng+LDpIv for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 01:55:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nominet.org.uk (mx4.nominet.org.uk [213.248.199.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B16721F8B0B for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 01:55:37 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: s=main.dk.nominet.selector; d=nominet.org.uk; c=nofws; q=dns; h=X-IronPort-AV:Received:Received:From:To:Subject: Thread-Topic:Thread-Index:Date:Message-ID:References: In-Reply-To:Accept-Language:Content-Language: X-MS-Has-Attach:X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:Content-Type: MIME-Version; b=U6M6Yk7DPECqK+37ed6IfBumjC9wXM8HtUn45k2D6zfF92K4PdCaQl0a zt89CYJ0gDaARSB4GWydklZsgir0d1d1gKej7guacy6jAQJE4HI2zpYpI hbwnVZh7pIHH5zu; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nominet.org.uk; i=Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk; q=dns/txt; s=main.dkim.nominet.selector; t=1324634138; x=1356170138; h=from:sender:reply-to:subject:date:message-id:to:cc: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-id: content-description:resent-date:resent-from:resent-sender: resent-to:resent-cc:resent-message-id:in-reply-to: references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:list-owner:list-archive; z=From:=20Ray=20Bellis=20 |Subject:=20Re:=20[dnsext]=20SRV=20prefix=20registry |Date:=20Fri,=2023=20Dec=202011=2009:55:33=20+0000 |Message-ID:=20<8BBDD425-FA9C-4C12-95C2-487FDA2E2679@nomi net.org.uk>|To:=20"dnsext@ietf.org"=20 |MIME-Version:=201.0|In-Reply-To:=20 |References:=20; bh=UvO+8XLvMKp3zxHZrR52v2mfVqrqJuWnFZt2/RKp7FI=; b=z/oBivz5Yys1zi382Bh9EqzaaB5+xvG61EbqOwwtOvIhMLKHjnReGviD bO4NXvnxSa6bhX0AJKQ1r1M+z0hsm7Pnqu/PB1upum7Ypy/7fm75F4Hds NRWLXQkh2UTBKKB; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,398,1320624000"; d="scan'208,217";a="30266473" Received: from wds-exc2.okna.nominet.org.uk ([213.248.197.145]) by mx4.nominet.org.uk with ESMTP; 23 Dec 2011 09:55:35 +0000 Received: from WDS-EXC1.okna.nominet.org.uk ([fe80::1593:1394:a91f:8f5f]) by wds-exc2.okna.nominet.org.uk ([fe80::7577:eaca:5241:25d4%19]) with mapi; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 09:55:35 +0000 From: Ray Bellis To: "dnsext@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry Thread-Index: AQHMwKyOjBdE2XzauEi0k3vIszQFW5XpMKyA Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 09:55:33 +0000 Message-ID: <8BBDD425-FA9C-4C12-95C2-487FDA2E2679@nominet.org.uk> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_8BBDD425FA9C4C1295C2487FDA2E2679nominetorguk_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 09:55:39 -0000 --_000_8BBDD425FA9C4C1295C2487FDA2E2679nominetorguk_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 22 Dec 2011, at 13:20, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: One piece of unfinished business that really should be cleared up before DN= SEXT closes is the lack of an IANA registry for SRV prefixes. This is now a big problem because people have been taking maters into their= own hands. I did for SAML and XKMS. There are many thousand SRV prefixes i= n use. They should be recorded 'somewhere'. I can write up a short draft if there is interest. Isn't this similar to what Dave Crocker already sent to DNSOP? Ray --_000_8BBDD425FA9C4C1295C2487FDA2E2679nominetorguk_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 22 Dec 2011, at 13= :20, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:

One piece of unfinished business that really s= hould be cleared up before DNSEXT closes is the lack of an IANA registry fo= r SRV prefixes.

This is now a big problem because people= have been taking maters into their own hands. I did for SAML and XKMS. The= re are many thousand SRV prefixes in use. They should be recorded 'somewher= e'.


I can write up a short draft if there is= interest. 

Isn't this similar to wha= t Dave Crocker already sent to DNSOP?


Ray


= --_000_8BBDD425FA9C4C1295C2487FDA2E2679nominetorguk_-- From mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp Fri Dec 23 02:32:31 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0702921F8ADE for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 02:32:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pGqNr-2HKEp8 for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 02:32:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C58DE21F849C for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 02:32:26 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 63549 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2011 11:10:02 -0000 Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 23 Dec 2011 11:10:02 -0000 Message-ID: <4EF45830.5050508@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 19:30:08 +0900 From: Masataka Ohta User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dnsext@ietf.org References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dnsext] SRV prefix registry X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:32:31 -0000 Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > One piece of unfinished business that really should be cleared up before > DNSEXT closes is the lack of an IANA registry for SRV prefixes. Does that matter? As RFC2782 specifies: Service The symbolic name of the desired service, as defined in Assigned Numbers [STD 2] or locally. Proto The symbolic name of the desired protocol, with an underscore (_) prepended to prevent collisions with DNS labels that occur in nature. SRV users are responsible to feed proper base domain names to applications properly interpret service and protocol names. > This is now a big problem because people have been taking maters into their > own hands. I did for SAML and XKMS. There are many thousand SRV prefixes in > use. They should be recorded 'somewhere'. I can't see any problem. Masataka Ohta