Re: [DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-00.txt

[Wessels, Duane]

Hi Petr,

I would say one is a subset of the other, but not exactly the same topic.

draft-moura-dnsop-negative-cache-loop focuses relatively narrowly on one type 
of resolution failure: delegations in a loop / cyclic dependency as documented 
in their TusNAME work.

draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures, on the other hand, is intended 
to cover resolution failures much more broadly. Based on our experience, we 
observe abnormal behavior in a number of different situations including 
outages, timeouts, server failures, validation failures, and delegation 
problems.

We plan to present our draft at the next meeting and I assume the other authors 
will as well, so that will be a good chance for the working group to give us 
all feedback.

DW



> On Feb 8, 2022, at 5:28 AM, Petr Špaček  wrote:
> 
> Hello everyone,
> 
> it seems that we now have two drafts about the same topic - this new one and 
> draft-moura-dnsop-negative-cache-loop.
> 
> Perhaps authors could discuss if they are in agreement and could pick one?
> 
> Petr Špaček  @  Internet Systems Consortium
> 
> 
> 
> On 14. 01. 22 19:14, Wessels, Duane wrote:
>> Dear DNSOP,
>> In light of some recent events and research, we feel that it could be 
>> beneficial to strengthen the requirements around negative caching of DNS 
>> resolution failures. Please see the recently submitted Internet Draft 
>> referenced below and let us know if you have any feedback.
>> DW
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> 
>>> *From: *mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org>>
>>> *Subject: **[EXTERNAL] New Version Notification for 
>>> draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-00.txt*
>>> *Date: *January 13, 2022 at 1:28:00 PM PST
>>> *To: *Duane Wessels mailto:dwess...@verisign.com>>, 
>>> Matthew Thomas mailto:mtho...@verisign.com>>, 
>>> William Carroll mailto:wicarr...@verisign.com>>
>>> 
>>> A new version of I-D, draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-00.txt
>>> has been successfully submitted by William Carroll and posted to the
>>> IETF repository.
>>> 
>>> Name:draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures
>>> Revision:00
>>> Title:Negative Caching of DNS Resolution Failures
>>> Document date:2022-01-13
>>> Group:Individual Submission
>>> Pages:13
>>> URL: 
>>> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1-PFLv-gJPKY7IUv53FHemsD97LSSdToCXsQHAguzJmIyVR8DlgbIUfK3NQBXH-5zgoS4DQIIvAT9SMf0y632bk-kgt0veCCWPt9eqKvdmUM_8bz-jZwYAtW9vzG8Yle7Gp7sv_jeafkAwZw5L2kCkJgy4hfNVxUERJJyCxnWI88uVj_yjKi5NiJgO5ANYPWUfYKdg_SnWCnWUDLuwAgLHaD476ZKPPsK82E0W_s8SJOQoH4OGG9glsNw5_92tWYg/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Farchive%2Fid%2Fdraft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-00.txt
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Status: 
>>> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1DyTvZbisHjKnPovlyhjAOtHxDAwKAqB2zXhGz5eE0Ca-1XPZAqQhDEyq-XNf1nKXr9SySf_nEWu5XQkh450f2xF3gmfQKMuLIyBqZqbYTfqZyyMbWrcyG3KqVYjmGV6dL3NSnwTn0iXcgzWvT7mLCzivYnGbpRH23V8z4fqw3ikCCp6NwxyuP8O_ak1u03fM9kH0QYTu_C1vGE3rGAn7dFkT0A4Vk3mRhgnZSlh3vhaJmDWMO1xylYlPvJBQ40Af/https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures%2F
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Htmlized: 
>>> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1MtdsiBy0XYrTWaww2jsyGmhpR1_l4cfsY2lzwq4M4gkF3VU-omPqy4e66hhbK7hfsy_x0cC1ZTi4VBXdrxpcOJPQgL-NdJ6b_iqYKCiDtAXs-6A60hPQqq4UZ7C7A1iyL29ghpvCZWMAvER26fj-YW4tmLvr5avpsjTGdZZTCIzvskQ9Nn-Degm8WJ03ldm01hMS6gB7ditarcN0g-dAl6zKyLmHKLy-txj3g8mNMsKTuTmkkE7vXFX-YxgBfJel/https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Abstract:
>>>   In the DNS, resolvers employ caching to reduce both latency for end
>>>   users and load on authoritative name servers.  The process of
>>>   resolution may result in one of three types of responses: (1) a
>>>   response containing the requested data; (2) a response indicating the
>>>   requested data does not exist; or (3) a non-response due to a

Re: [DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-00.txt

[Petr Špaček]

Hello everyone,

it seems that we now have two drafts about the same topic - this new one 
and draft-moura-dnsop-negative-cache-loop.


Perhaps authors could discuss if they are in agreement and could pick one?

Petr Špaček  @  Internet Systems Consortium



On 14. 01. 22 19:14, Wessels, Duane wrote:

Dear DNSOP,

In light of some recent events and research, we feel that it could be 
beneficial to strengthen the requirements around negative caching of DNS 
resolution failures. Please see the recently submitted Internet Draft 
referenced below and let us know if you have any feedback.


DW



Begin forwarded message:

*From: *mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org>>
*Subject: **[EXTERNAL] New Version Notification for 
draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-00.txt*

*Date: *January 13, 2022 at 1:28:00 PM PST
*To: *Duane Wessels >, Matthew Thomas >, William Carroll 
mailto:wicarr...@verisign.com>>


A new version of I-D, 
draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-00.txt

has been successfully submitted by William Carroll and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures
Revision:00
Title:Negative Caching of DNS Resolution Failures
Document date:2022-01-13
Group:Individual Submission
Pages:13
URL: 
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-00.txt 

Status: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures/ 

Htmlized: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures 




Abstract:
  In the DNS, resolvers employ caching to reduce both latency for end
  users and load on authoritative name servers.  The process of
  resolution may result in one of three types of responses: (1) a
  response containing the requested data; (2) a response indicating the
  requested data does not exist; or (3) a non-response due to a
  resolution failure in which the resolver does not receive any useful
  information regarding the data's existence.  This document concerns
  itself only with the third type.

  RFC 2308 specifies requirements for DNS negative caching.  There,
  caching of type (1) and (2) responses is mandatory and caching of
  type (3) responses is optional.  This document updates RFC 2308 to
  require negative caching for DNS resolution failures.




The IETF Secretariat


___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

[DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-00.txt

[Wessels, Duane]

Dear DNSOP,

In light of some recent events and research, we feel that it could be 
beneficial to strengthen the requirements around negative caching of DNS 
resolution failures. Please see the recently submitted Internet Draft 
referenced below and let us know if you have any feedback.

DW


Begin forwarded message:

From: mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] New Version Notification for 
draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-00.txt
Date: January 13, 2022 at 1:28:00 PM PST
To: Duane Wessels mailto:dwess...@verisign.com>>, 
Matthew Thomas mailto:mtho...@verisign.com>>, William 
Carroll mailto:wicarr...@verisign.com>>

A new version of I-D, draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by William Carroll and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name: draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures
Revision: 00
Title: Negative Caching of DNS Resolution Failures
Document date: 2022-01-13
Group: Individual Submission
Pages: 13
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-00.txt
Status: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures/
Htmlized:   
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dwmtwc-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures


Abstract:
  In the DNS, resolvers employ caching to reduce both latency for end
  users and load on authoritative name servers.  The process of
  resolution may result in one of three types of responses: (1) a
  response containing the requested data; (2) a response indicating the
  requested data does not exist; or (3) a non-response due to a
  resolution failure in which the resolver does not receive any useful
  information regarding the data's existence.  This document concerns
  itself only with the third type.

  RFC 2308 specifies requirements for DNS negative caching.  There,
  caching of type (1) and (2) responses is mandatory and caching of
  type (3) responses is optional.  This document updates RFC 2308 to
  require negative caching for DNS resolution failures.




The IETF Secretariat



___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop