I don't think you can drop section 3.4 completely, but it should be updated to acknowledge Refuse-Any <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any-04#section-4>. Only behavior 2 (HINFO synthesization) allows total ignorance of special ALIAS behavior; every other (including conventional) needs modification to deal with ANY queries against names at which ALIAS is the only RRSet.
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Ólafur Guðmundsson <ola...@cloudflare.com> wrote: > Anthony, > > Good writeup > > Section 3.4 is in conflict with Refuse-Any draft (in WGLC) > IMHO there is no need to say that there is special processing for ANY > query; so drop section 3.4 > > Olafur > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Anthony Eden <anthony.e...@dnsimple.com> > wrote: > >> After attending the dnsop meeting on Monday I decided it was time I >> submitted my first ID for review: >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dnsop-eden-alias-rr-type/ >> >> This draft describes the ALIAS/ANAME record (aka CNAME-flattening) >> that numerous vendors and DNS providers are now supporting in >> proprietary fashions. I hope that this draft will eventually lead to a >> good mechanism for interop of ALIAS/ANAME records. >> >> Sincerely, >> Anthony Eden >> >> -- >> DNSimple.com >> http://dnsimple.com/ >> Twitter: @dnsimple >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
