Thanks to you both. I updated the draft with Evan’s text and merged some of Michael’s text to:
https://github.com/oerdnj/draft-sury-dnsop-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records Cheers, -- Ondřej Surý ond...@isc.org > On 26 Mar 2018, at 16:57, Evan Hunt <e...@isc.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:22:30AM -0400, Michael Casadevall wrote: >> I think to be more specifically, the end goal should be the ability to >> treat obsolete record types as RFC 3597 and remove special casing for >> them. That way, new resolvers simply have to implement 3597 and not >> worry about associated edge cases with the obsolete types. > > Thank you, that's what I was trying to say, you said it better. > >>> 2. responders SHOULD NOT compress rdata when rendering obsolete/deprecated >>> type records to wire format. >>> >> >> The problem here is that right up until the point the camel declares >> these RRtypes dead, the specification specifically allows them to be >> compressed. > > But it's always allowed them not to be compressed, too. The trouble > PowerDNS had was because it wasn't expecting compression, but I would > expect the opposite problem (failing because something *didn't* compress) > to be rarer. > >> 1. Authoritative servers SHOULD warn when loading zones with obsolete >> record types >> >> 2. Resolvers MUST never send obsolete RRtypes in a compressed format. > > Problem here: If the resolver is treating the record as opaque, then it > can only send it along in whatever format it was received in, so this > requirement doesn't work as written. But I think what you mean is that > even if the resolver is able to parse compressed rdata, it MUST NOT > compress when sending the answer along to its own client. This is > re-stated in point 5, below. > >> 3. Signers MUST treat rdata as opaque >> >> 4. Obsolete RRtypes MUST never be treated as a known-type with respect >> to the wire protocol >> >> 5. Resolvers MAY support legacy compression for received data for >> backward compatibility if desired, but SHOULD warn if such information >> is received. Compressed records MUST never be re-transmitted. > > You use MUSTs where I used SHOULDs, but I think we're both pointing > in the same direction. > > -- > Evan Hunt -- e...@isc.org > Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
