Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet
On Sep 23, 2015, at 4:40 PM, Dave Lawrence wrote: > Ted Lemon writes: >> It would be helpful if the authors could explain why the REFUSED >> response is being used here. > > Not to be glib, but because that's what Wilmer originally specified. > That's thus what got implemented by the existing implementations (and > there are more than you'd likely imagine, too). Thanks, that’s what I expected. My concern is that the document currently states this unapologetically, so a reader who does not know the context might be tempted to implement it that way. The way the document is written at present is as if it is a protocol specification intended to be implemented. There is no applicability statement that says something like "there are a lot of problems with this version of the spec, and you should wait and implement version 2 if you don’t already have an implementation or need to interoperate with version 1." I think the document needs to have some clear language restricting its applicability, and I also think that in cases where what was done in version 1 was obviously wrong, the document should say so. I think it’s actually harmful to publish the version 1 document as an RFC without the version 2 document, to be honest. I get why you want to do it in two steps, but from where I’m sitting this feels like an unfortunate decision if the first step is to publish something that looks like a perfectly valid spec and then the spec that does things the right way comes possibly much later on. ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet
On 24 Sep 2015, at 13:42, Ted Lemon wrote: > On Sep 23, 2015, at 4:40 PM, Dave Lawrence wrote: >> Ted Lemon writes: >>> It would be helpful if the authors could explain why the REFUSED >>> response is being used here. >> >> Not to be glib, but because that's what Wilmer originally specified. >> That's thus what got implemented by the existing implementations (and >> there are more than you'd likely imagine, too). > > Thanks, that’s what I expected. My concern is that the document currently > states this unapologetically, so a reader who does not know the context might > be tempted to implement it that way. The way the document is written at > present is as if it is a protocol specification intended to be implemented. > There is no applicability statement that says something like "there are a lot > of problems with this version of the spec, and you should wait and implement > version 2 if you don’t already have an implementation or need to interoperate > with version 1." I think the document needs to have some clear language > restricting its applicability, and I also think that in cases where what was > done in version 1 was obviously wrong, the document should say so. I agree, when I last read this I had the IESG Note in my head (and I already knew that this was just documenting existing deployments). Looking again, I suggest that the IESG Note be moved to the main text and not be removed prior to publication. John > > I think it’s actually harmful to publish the version 1 document as an RFC > without the version 2 document, to be honest. I get why you want to do it > in two steps, but from where I’m sitting this feels like an unfortunate > decision if the first step is to publish something that looks like a > perfectly valid spec and then the spec that does things the right way comes > possibly much later on. > > ___ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop John Dickinson http://sinodun.com Sinodun Internet Technologies Ltd. Magdalen Centre Oxford Science Park Robert Robinson Avenue Oxford OX4 4GA U.K. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet
John Dickinson writes: > I suggest that the IESG Note be moved to the main text and not be > removed prior to publication. I agree, and am making some edits today for review by the co-authors. ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet
On Sep 24, 2015, at 8:52 AM, John Dickinson wrote: > I agree, when I last read this I had the IESG Note in my head (and I already > knew that this was just documenting existing deployments). Looking again, I > suggest that the IESG Note be moved to the main text and not be removed prior > to publication. I think an IESG note is what happens when the authors don’t agree. In this case it sounds like Dave is on board with clarifying the applicability, and that seems like a much better outcome. (Thanks, Dave!) ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
[DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-05.txt
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations Working Group of the IETF. Title : DNS Terminology Authors : Paul Hoffman Andrew Sullivan Kazunori Fujiwara Filename: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-05.txt Pages : 27 Date: 2015-09-24 Abstract: The DNS is defined in literally dozens of different RFCs. The terminology used by implementers and developers of DNS protocols, and by operators of DNS systems, has sometimes changed in the decades since the DNS was first defined. This document gives current definitions for many of the terms used in the DNS in a single document. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-05 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-05 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
