On 4/3/15, 15:21, "Casey Deccio" <ca...@deccio.net> wrote: > However, independent of the location of the zone cut, the text is still > confusing (to me), as it implies that there are multiple nodes and names.
Well, that case: > > Here is an alternative wording, which adds the context of RRsets: > ---- > Delegation Point: Term used to describe a delegated name when used in > conjunction with RRsets on the parental side of the zone cut. For example, > the delegation NS RRs for "foo.example" are found at the delegation point, > which is in the "example" zone (as opposed to the authoritative NS RRs at the > zone apex of the "foo.example" zone). See also zone apex. > > Zone Apex: Term used to describe the a delegated name when used in conjunction > with RRsets on the child side of a zone cut. See also delegation point. > ---- I'll start with, I've started to use cut point instead of delegation point, so to me there's a cut and an apex at a delegation. I'm not saying this to start a revolution or new terminology, but in recognition of the confusion. Delegation Point: the collection of records at a name which owns an NS set that are visible in the parent zone. Zone apex: the collection of records at a name which owns an NS set that are visible in the child zone. "Visible" is a nod to "occluded" records, those records that are subject to appear in an AXFR but are below a zone cut. (Section 3.5 of RFC 5936.) Casey, now, see what you've started. And on a Friday, no less! Having to dig up that reference to "occluded". So, back to the proposed definitions: Delegation Point: Term used to name the set of record sets owned by a name that also owns an NS set that belong in the parent zone. (The term "belong" needs fixing.) Zone apex: Term used to name the set of record sets owned by a name that also owns an NS set that belong in the child zone.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
