Re: [DNSOP] Second Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any

2017-03-19 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:11:26AM -0400, tjw ietf wrote a message of 69 lines which said: > This begins a Second WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any. The Document is > located here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any/ IMHO, the document is both useful, and ready t

Re: [DNSOP] Second Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any

2017-03-19 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:19:27AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote a message of 63 lines which said: > he has made the excellent point that the query exists, and has > well-defined semantics Well-defined, may be (but I do not think so, RFC 1035 is almost silent on it), but not well-understood by man

[DNSOP] adoption mechanics and disclaimers wrt dns-rpz

2017-03-19 Thread Paul Vixie
on sunday march 12, chinese.apri...@gmail.com wrote as follows: > I'd be happy to see the document proceed under two conditions: 1) it > becomes a WG document, subject to IETF change control, and 2) that the > disclaimer requested back on 20170103 be added to the document. To refresh > the collec

Re: [DNSOP] adoption mechanics and disclaimers wrt dns-rpz

2017-03-19 Thread Paul Vixie
fwiw, here is the text of an RPZ brief provided to the ICANN TEG in the recent copenhagen meeting. the text was edited by me, and all errors or omissions are mine: > What are Response Policy Zones (RPZ)? > > A Response Policy Zone (RPZ) is a way to convey DNS resolution policy > from a security

[DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03

2017-03-19 Thread Suzanne Woolf
Hi, The INT Area Director who oversees the homenet WG, Terry Manderson, has asked DNSOP participants to review https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03.txt , "Special Use Top Level Domain '.homenet’”, with the following aspects in

Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03

2017-03-19 Thread Paul Hoffman
On 19 Mar 2017, at 18:44, Suzanne Woolf wrote: Hi, The INT Area Director who oversees the homenet WG, Terry Manderson, has asked DNSOP participants to review https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03.txt , "Special Use Top Level

Re: [DNSOP] FW: New Version Notification for draft-pan-dnsop-edns-isp-location-00

2017-03-19 Thread Lanlan Pan
Hi Warren， Obviously we all know that network topology is not equal to physical topology. To give "most precisely" for authoritative servers to decide most satisfied "network topology", ECS use client subnet. At NDSS there is a question that "why not directly use AS number" ? client subnet can b

Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03

2017-03-19 Thread George Michaelson
Where's the measurement of existing use? Do we understand to what extent this label is already in use, and potentially has operational issues? -G On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > On 19 Mar 2017, at 18:44, Suzanne Woolf wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> The INT Area Director who overs

Re: [DNSOP] FW: New Version Notification for draft-pan-dnsop-edns-isp-location-00

2017-03-19 Thread Paul Vixie
On Monday, March 20, 2017 3:40:46 AM GMT Lanlan Pan wrote: > At NDSS there is a question that "why not directly use AS number" ? client > subnet can be maped into AS number, which is used for bgp route at network > topology. > > My answer was that AS4134 cover multiple provinces in china, from so