if we are designing protocol and its operations, then policy might not be the 
best to codify in protocol specs.
i am not persuaded that specifying terminology for every possible edge case is 
a great use of resources, 
particularly since there seems to be a significant blurring between  defining 
terminology at the protocol level
and terminology for implementation and policy.    Is that concern important to 
the group?

manning

bmann...@karoshi.com
PO Box 12317
Marina del Rey, CA 90295
310.322.8102



On 1May2015Friday, at 7:41, Edward Lewis <edward.le...@icann.org> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 4/30/15, 10:35, "Andrew Sullivan" <a...@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
> 
>>> Vice versa, once the parent removes
>>> the NS set, the delegation is removed regardless of what the child
>>> "thinks."
>> 
>> Well, effectively maybe not.  If a resolver "sticks" on the child,
>> then the delegation won't move regardless.
> 
> The context here is the definition of the term "delegation".
> 
> In operations, it's expected that a parent could remove a delegation (in
> the policy sense) and because of TTL's, the child's presence sticks in the
> cache.  This is a legitimate outcome of the use of caching.  (It can be
> abused, of course, but I'm just trying to stick to definitions of terms,
> not operational issues.)
> 
> In my personal judgement, the mere fact that there is a transitional state
> of a half-baked delegation is not significant.  Perhaps there's a need to
> "name" this state (I can see trying to explain this to a customer).  But
> to me that doesn't mean the definition of delegation has to take this into
> account.
> 
> In "policy time" the delegation ends when the parent's zone serial is
> incremented and the cut point is gone.  In "real time" the delegation ends
> in the eyes of a resolver when it discovers there is no cut point.  Yes,
> these are different, but to define "delegation" I would stick to the
> perspective of the parent because it is the one legitimately holding the
> cards.
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to