[DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-multi-provider-dnssec-03.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 WG of the IETF. Title : Multi Signer DNSSEC models Authors : Shumon Huque Pallavi Aras

[DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-woodworth-bulk-rr-09.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 WG of the IETF. Title : BULK DNS Resource Records Authors : John Woodworth Dean Ballew

[DNSOP] FW: New Version Notification for draft-woodworth-npn-00.txt

Hi DNSOP, I've submitted the NPN draft into datatracker. This has been broken out of the original BULK-RR draft. I need to migrate the IPR linkage from BULK-RR to NPN but haven’t figured out this piece as of yet. Best regards, John -- A new version of I-D, draft-woodworth-npn-00.txt has been

[DNSOP] FW: New Version Notification for draft-woodworth-bulk-rr-09.txt

Hi DNSOP, I've updated datatracker for this draft as well. Best, John -- A new version of I-D, draft-woodworth-bulk-rr-09.txt has been successfully submitted by John Woodworth and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-woodworth-bulk-rr Revision: 09 Title: BULK DNS

Re: [DNSOP] [dns-privacy] Do53 vs DoT vs DoH Page Load Performance Study at ANRW

On 7/21/19, 4:27 PM, "DNSOP on behalf of Puneet Sood": > Running the experiment from locations which are further away from cloud > providers would provide another interesting set of data. [JL] +1. I understand the US FCC is considering running DoH tests from their Measuring Broadband America end

Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data

After a hallway conversation with Evan yesterday, I wanted to clarify a few things that I came across when working on this. Point one is the use-case of NOTE. Point two is an argument for the general usefulness of a COVERT record. On NOTE: I am an admin who uses my zone files as a source of

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoptions: draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang

Petr Špaček writes: On 16. 07. 19 10:03, Matthijs Mekking wrote: On 7/16/19 1:49 AM, Joe Abley wrote: On Jul 15, 2019, at 19:13, Tim Wicinski wrote: Also, the current draft enumerates DLV which needs to be removed. Can you explain this? I can understand a forthcoming clarification on

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoptions: draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang

Benno Overeinder writes: Dear DNSOP WG, The draft YANG Types for DNS Classes and Resource Record Types, draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang, has been presented at the IETF 103 and IETF 104. During the IETF 104 meeting, the authors asked for adoption by the DNSOP WG. The feedback from

Re: [DNSOP] a CDN perspective on ANAME challenges

Reading the draft again, I think a challenge with the structure relative to the CDN use-case is that requirements on how and where sibling record resolution is done are derived from the target of the ANAME, not from the authoritative nameserver. It may make sense to be much more clear on this, as

[DNSOP] [ Inbox - Update & Verification ]

​A N T O I N E G E R M A N O S Notary Public - International Business Law Solicitor Notary Public ATT. Antoine Germanos Office GF, 1st & 2nd Floor ; Jal El Dib Highway Jal El Dib ; Mount Lebanon - Lebanon Tel/Fax: +961 (4) 715273 ; +961 (3) 161818 E-mail: anto...@antoinegermanos.com

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-aname-04.txt

Hello, this is an attempt to review draft-ietf-dnsop-aname-04 with fresh eyes - I've managed to forget the old versions ;-) On 08. 07. 19 22:05, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: > Filename: draft-ietf-dnsop-aname-04.txt > 4. ANAME processing by primary masters > o Otherwise, wai

Re: [DNSOP] [Add] [dns-privacy] Do53 vs DoT vs DoH Page Load Performance Study at ANRW

On 7/22/19, 5:42 PM, "DNSOP on behalf of Jason Livingood": > On 7/21/19, 4:27 PM, "DNSOP on behalf of Puneet Sood": >> Running the experiment from locations which are further away from cloud >> providers would provide another interesting set of data. > [JL] +1. I understand the US FCC is conside

Re: [DNSOP] [Add] [dns-privacy] Do53 vs DoT vs DoH Page Load Performance Study at ANRW

On Monday, 22 July 2019 20:45:43 UTC Andrew Campling wrote: > ... > > [AC] This would be helpful given it appears some (all?) DoH resolvers have > indicated that they will not pass sufficient information to (rival) CDN > vendors to allow geographic routing. Clearly if this is commonplace then > p

Re: [DNSOP] Caching of negative zone (non-authoritative) responses

On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 05:27:21PM +, Michael J. Sheldon wrote a message of 23 lines which said: > And it still leaves the issue that recursives should not just keep > hammering the lame delegations when they've gotten a REFUSED > response. Sorry for being late in the discussion but draft

Re: [DNSOP] [Doh] [Add] [dns-privacy] Do53 vs DoT vs DoH Page Load Performance Study at ANRW

> On 22 Jul 2019, at 21:52, Paul Vixie wrote: > > apparently ECS creates problems for privacy, but _how could we have > suspected_? IIRC the ECS privacy issues were recognised at the time. They lost out to the argument that CDNs were already doing (or about to do) ECS and it would be bette

Re: [DNSOP] [Doh] [Add] [dns-privacy] Do53 vs DoT vs DoH Page Load Performance Study at ANRW

On Monday, 22 July 2019 21:19:47 UTC Jim Reid wrote: > > On 22 Jul 2019, at 21:52, Paul Vixie wrote: > > > > apparently ECS creates problems for privacy, but _how could we have > > suspected_? (that, by the way, was sarcasm.) > IIRC the ECS privacy issues were recognised at the time. raised, y

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoptions: draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang

Dear DNSWG, I also support the adoption. Normen Kowalewski > On 22. Jul 2019, at 20:13, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > Benno Overeinder writes: > >> Dear DNSOP WG, The draft YANG Types for DNS Classes and Resource Record >> Types, draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang, has been presented at

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoptions: draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang

Apologies I meant, DNSOP WG of course, well - its late down here... > On 23. Jul 2019, at 00:03, Normen Kowalewski wrote: > > Dear DNSWG, > > I also support the adoption. > > Normen Kowalewski > >> On 22. Jul 2019, at 20:13, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >> >> Benno Overeinder writes: >> >>> D

[DNSOP] bar bof, edns buffer size, avoid fragmentation

fujiwara-san and i will be at an otherwise quiet bar at 21h local time tonight, here in the neighborhood of ietf Montreal. email me if you want to join us. ⁣Get BlueMail for Android ​___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/lis

[DNSOP] draft-hoffman-dns-terminology-ter-01.txt - some comments

Daer Stephane, Paul and DNSOP WG, 1. it was noted in todays meeting that the the “add" is not based on any underlying rfc, and thus might be somewhat too vague. +1 on that draft-hoffman-dns-terminology-ter-01.txt says: Applications Doing DNS (ADD): Applications that act as stub re

Re: [DNSOP] draft-hoffman-dns-terminology-ter-01.txt - some comments

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 5:38 PM Normen Kowalewski wrote: > Daer Stephane, Paul and DNSOP WG, I think the draft is generally very helpful in navigating the acronyms and abbreviations associated with this space. It should be pointed out that "Do53: DNS over UDP or TCP as defined in [RFC1035]...

Re: [DNSOP] draft-hoffman-dns-terminology-ter-01.txt - some comments

Rob, i should have more clearly stated that I also consider this draft and generally agreements on commonly used terms very helpful. Paul, thanks for writing it. BR, Normen > On 23. Jul 2019, at 02:55, Rob Sayre wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 5:38 PM Normen Kowalewski