Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-huston-kskroll-sentinel

[Benno Overeinder]

I support adoption and will review the draft.

-- Benno

On 11/16/2017 09:23 AM, tjw ietf wrote:
> All
> 
> The author has rolled out a new version addressing comments from the
> meeting on Monday, and we feel it’s ready to move this along.
> 
> This starts a Call for Adoption for draft-huston-kskroll-sentinel
> 
> The draft is available here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-huston-kskroll-sentinel/
> 
> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption
> by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.
> 
> Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.
> 
> This call for adoption ends: 30 November 2017 23:59
> 
> Thanks,
> tim wicinski
> DNSOP co-chair
> 
> 
> ___
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
> 

-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

Re: [DNSOP] on 'when to implement' (was: Re: Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel)

[Benno Overeinder]

Reacting on the "when to implement" part of the subject, and speaking
for NLnet Labs.

On 08/05/2018 11:11, Peter van Dijk wrote:
>> From implementors point, it makes little sense to start implementing
>> before the protocol change is almost fully baked (aka WGLC and
>> further), because until then the protocol might change considerably.
> 
> It makes little sense to call a protocol change ‘fully baked’ if nobody
> has checked that implementation is even possible.

I think there is a sweet point when developers start to think of
implementing a draft.  Not necessarily WGLC, but a stable document is
preferred with us at NLnet Labs.  (We indicated this also on the mic in
the Prague DNSOP WG meeting (or Singapore?) for the kskroll-sentinel draft.)

As Ralph Dolmans mentioned in his email on the list (specifically for
the kskroll-sentinel draft):
"We need a somewhat stable specification before we make code that will
be used in the real world to prevent pollution and in this case would
make it even harder to do proper measurements."

Above is specific for the kskroll-sentinel draft of course, and for
other drafts this point for adoption to get a (prototype) implementation
can be earlier or later.


-- Benno

-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel-12

[Benno Overeinder]

To followup on myself, and was dropped with quoting email.

On 09/05/2018 15:12, Benno Overeinder wrote:
> 
> Implementation reports/observations for BIND and Unbound have been sent
> to the mailing list.
> 

For the future, if the DNSOP working group likes to see an
implementation report in a more structured manner, e.g. following the
RFC 2119 terms for compliance, please let me know.

Of course, we are not volunteering to write extensive reports, but a set
of minimal considerations could give guidance.

-- Benno

-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi,

On 11/06/2018 22:15, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On 11 Jun 2018, at 12:43, Job Snijders wrote:
> 
>> For what it's worth - all my concerns have been addressed.
> 
> +1 to Job's feeling.

Thank you all.

>> I believe
>> the document to be in good shape now and would support a progression
>> through WG LC.
> 
> except that we already went through WG Last Call.
> 
> The changes to the document are large, but it is not clear to me that
> enough people are reading them to warrant another WG Last Call before
> sending it to the IETF Last Call.

Fair enough, we will coordinate with Terry Manderson, the AD for the
document, if another WG Last Call is appropriate.

Regards,

-- Benno

-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

[DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix

[Benno Overeinder]

A number of reviewers of the accompanying draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf
suggested to have both drafts WG Last Call reviewed in one go.  We think
this makes sense and the last version of the
draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix-01 is good for WG Last Call.

This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix

Current versions of the draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix

The Current Intended Status of this document is: Best Current Practice

Please review the draft and offer relevant comments.
If this does not seem appropriate please speak out.
If someone feels the document is *not* ready for publication, please
speak out with your reasons.

This starts a two week Working Group Last Call process, and ends on:
Wednesday 11 July 2018.

Thanks,

-- Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf

[Benno Overeinder]

On 25/06/2018 17:29, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On 25 Jun 2018, at 3:27, Benno Overeinder wrote:
> 
>>
>> This starts a two week Working Group Last Call process, and ends on: 9
>> July 2018.
> 
> Just to be clear: this is a WG Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf
> but *not* on draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix, correct?

Yes indeed.  We will start a WG Last Call for attrleaf-fix independently.

Thanks for the clarification.

-- Benno

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

[DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf

[Benno Overeinder]

The chairs have read the email discussions on the DNSOP mailing list and
think that all feedback and comments have been addressed by the author,
either in the draft or on the mailing list.

This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf

Current versions of the draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf/

The Current Intended Status of this document is: Best Current Practice

Please review the draft and offer relevant comments.
If this does not seem appropriate please speak out.
If someone feels the document is *not* ready for publication, please
speak out with your reasons.

This starts a two week Working Group Last Call process, and ends on: 9
July 2018.

Thanks,

-- Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] A conversational description of sentinel.

[Benno Overeinder]

On 07/02/2018 10:12, Warren Kumari wrote:
> Whoops, last message was blank; finger fail.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 3:57 AM, Warren Kumari  wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 2:15 AM, Petr Špaček  wrote:
>>>
>>> Fine. Now we need to have something actionable, e.g. set of names for
>>> Geoff to test.
>>>
>>> Can we have couple proposals and test them in one go, so results are
>>> comparable?
>>>
>>> I've gathered these:
>>>
>>> kskroll-sentinel-is-ta-
>>> kskroll-sentinel-not-ta-
>>> is-ta--
>>> not-ta--
>>>
>>> I propose longer but more descriptive variant:
>>> kskroll-sentinel-dnssec-root-trust-anchor-key-trusted-yes-NNN
>>> kskroll-sentinel-dnssec-root-trust-anchor-key-trusted-no-
> 
> 
> 
> I personally like "kskroll-sentinel-is-ta-", or "is-ta--".
> 
> I really do not like
> "kskroll-sentinel-dnssec-root-trust-anchor-key-trusted-yes-NNN" as:
> $echo "kskroll-sentinel-dnssec-root-trust-anchor-key-trusted-yes-NNN" | wc -c
>62


For what it is worth, I am with Warren, and particular like
"kskroll-sentinel-is-ta-".


-- Benno

-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

[DNSOP] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-12

[Benno Overeinder]

Benno Overeinder has requested publication of draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-12 as 
Best Current Practice on behalf of the DNSOP working group.

Please verify the document's state at 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf/

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

[DNSOP] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix-03

[Benno Overeinder]

Benno Overeinder has requested publication of draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix-03 
as Best Current Practice on behalf of the DNSOP working group.

Please verify the document's state at 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix/

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

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

Procedure/process update.

As announced, the WG LC should/would be closed today, but draft
reviewers suggested to run attrleaf and attrleaf-fix together through
the process.  The WG LC will be closed this Wednesday, July 11th for
both attrleaf and attrleaf-fix.

-- Benno


On 07/07/2018 08:55, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> (no hats)
> 
> I've read the -10 version and I'm very happy how Dave has split the
> documents up.  
> 
> I have not finished going through the attrleaf-fix. 
> 
> I do like Ondrej's comment about bundling the two documents.  They do
> work well together.
> 
> thanks Dave. 
> Tim
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 1:26 PM, John R Levine  > wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2018, Dave Crocker wrote:
> 
>  Translator's note: change this to "left most" when translated
>  to Arabic or Hebrew.
> 
> 
> in rtl contexts, domain names are shown with the root at the left???
> 
> 
> If they're IDNs in rtl languages, apparently so.  If they're a mix,
> or all ltr, it's anyone's guess.  When writing up advice on
> implementing EAI addresses I talked to people who use the Internet
> in Arabic and the message I got was that it's rather confused.
> 
> Regards,
> John Levine, jo...@taugh.com , Taughannock
> Networks, Trumansburg NY
> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail.
> https://jl.ly
> 
> ___
> 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

Re: [DNSOP] 2nd Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel

[Benno Overeinder]

And with this, the WG Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel is
closed (actually last Friday already).

We will continue with the next step with the AD for this document, Terry
Manderson.

-- Benno


On 02/07/2018 22:20, Warren Kumari wrote:
> Firstly, thank you! (for keeping the WG informed, I met with Joe in
> Panama and thanked him then too).
> 
> I generally like to update at least the GitHub version during WGLC so
> that people can better see the current state, but this time travel and
> such got in the way. I have integrated / addressed most of these, and
> posted a new version. 
> 
> Because I only got around to addressing them around 2 hours before the
> draft cutoff I haven't checked with my co-authors, nor created separate
> GitHub issues for them.
> 
> ​Thanks again!
> W​

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

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi Suzanne, Warren, DNSOP WG,

> On 7 Apr 2018, at 04:09, Warren Kumari  wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 5:49 PM, Suzanne Woolf  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> WG vendors/implementers: Can folks who have implemented kskroll-sentinel, or 
>> considered implementing it, please speak up on your concerns/plans?
> 
> Yup, that would be helpful  - bits I know of are that Knot has an
> implementation based on an earlier version (with a different label),
> and Petr says that it will be some time before they are able to update
> it; I've never touched Lua, if I get a chance I might try patch their
> implementation with the new strings ("Hold my beer" / "How hard can it
> be?")).
> I think I heard that ISC was considering adding support, but was
> planning on waiting till RFC / some sort of LC.
> 

NLnet Labs is planning to add kskroll-sentinel support soon.  We will report 
progress and feedback to the authors of the kskroll-sentinel draft.

Code will be made available in our repository and asap be part of the Unbound 
release (for packaging & distribution).

Cheers,

— Benno


-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

Re: [DNSOP] Appointment of 3rd chair for DNSOP.

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear WG,

Warren, thank you for the introduction to the WG.

I am happy to join forces with Suzanne, Tim and the WG, and collaborate with 
all of you in the DNSOP WG.

Best,

— Benno


> On 12 Apr 2018, at 01:53, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net> wrote:
> 
> Dear WG,
> 
> As I mentioned in London, Im appointing a 3rd chair for DNSOP, to help
> with the load, etc.
> 
> A number of people kindly volunteered, and I had a really hard time
> selecting from such qualified candidates.  After agonizing over it for
> a few weeks, I've decided to appoint Benno Overeinder.
> 
> Benno is new to the chairing role, so please go easy on him for the
> first while as he learns the ropes -- I'm confident Suzanne and Tim
> (and all of the WG!) will be willing to help him get spun up.
> 
> I'd like to thank everyone again who volunteered, I really appreciate
> your willingness to serve,
>   W
> -- 
> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
> idea in the first place.
> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
> of pants.
>   ---maf
> 
> ___
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

[DNSOP] 2nd Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel

[Benno Overeinder]

After the WG last call for the kskroll-sentinel draft, a number of
issues were discussed and settled.  The co-chairs want to announce a
second WG last call of *one* week.  We think the document is ready, but
we want to give the working group the opportunity for a final reading.


This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel

Current versions of the draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel/

The Current Intended Status of this document is: Proposed Standard

Please review the draft and offer relevant comments.
If this does not seem appropriate please speak out.
If someone feels the document is *not* ready for publication, please
speak out with your reasons.

This starts a *one* week Working Group Last Call process, and ends on:
23:59 29 June 2018.

Thanks,

-- Benno

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

[DNSOP] Volunteers for Minutes Takers and Jabber Scribes

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi DNSOP WG,

We are looking for volunteers to take minutes and jabber scribe for the
DNSOP WG meeting this afternoon 13:50-15:50.

Please send an email to dnsop-chairs or reply directly.

Otherwise we'll just have to ask at the start of the meeting.

Thank you very much,

-- Suzanne/Tim/Benno

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

[DNSOP] IETF 103: Call for agenda items

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

We have requested one DNSOP session of 2 hours for the IETF 103.  The
preliminary IETF agenda will be published on October 5th.

Please submit a request for agenda time if you want to present a draft.
We will be following up on several items, but there is also room for new
work.

Thanks,

Your DNSOP chairs
(Suzanne, Tim and Benno)

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

[DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-song-atr-large-resp

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear DNSOP WG,

We discussed this work (draft -01) in Montreal, and different opinions wrt. 
adoption were expressed.  In the past months, the authors pushed a draft 
version -02 that addressed and resolved some of these comments.  

This starts a Call for Adoption for:
draft-song-atr-large-resp

The draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-song-atr-large-resp/

Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by 
DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.

Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.  The 
WG accepts the document or not, but the WG chairs also expect a commitment from 
the WG participants who support the document to contribute to the draft, 
review, etc.

The intended status of the draft is Experimental, but we want to ask 
developers/vendors if they plan to implement it.   

This call for adoption ends: 1 February 2019

Thanks,

Benno Overeinder
DNSOP co-chair



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

Re: [DNSOP] comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-serve-stale-03

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi,

On 08/03/2019 21:29, Dave Lawrence wrote:

> Huh, My understanding from a hallway conversation with Benno was that
> the immediate response is only sent for names that would have been
> subject to pre-fetching, such that the immediate response in this case
> is sufficiently covered under the guidance of a recent attempt being
> made.  If that is not the case, and you can get stale answers from
> Unbound even without a recent refresh attempt, then I personally think
> that is an error in Unbound and not this document.

The current implementation of serve stale in Unbound is closely related
with the pre-fetching process.  It works well for most cases, that is
names that are frequently queried for, so the pre-fetch assures for
fresh and correct entries in the cache.

For names with relative short TTLs and that are not frequently queried
for (i.e. less frequent than covered by the TTL), the entry from the
cache is stale and only after serving the reply, a pre-fetch (resolve)
is initiated to update/re-fresh the entry in the cache.

We acknowledge this behavior is not optimal in some situations and will
reimplement a part of the re-fresh strategy of cache entries.

-- Benno

-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

Re: [DNSOP] Minimum viable ANAME

[Benno Overeinder]

On 26/03/2019 23:49, Dan York wrote:
> As Tim Wicinski mentioned in his review of documents today in DNSOP, this is 
> not a simple problem to solve and there are some fundamental (and passionate) 
> disagreements about the way forward. 
> 
> Tim’s suggestion of an interim (presumably virtual?) to focus specifically on 
> this issue seems to make sense to me.

Given the discussion on the list, the chairs have decided to schedule a
10-15 minute slot at the end of the Friday DNSOP session.

After an overview of the context, Matthijs Mekking will present the
current status of the ANAME draft -02 and (alternative) paths to make
progress at the WG.

See updated agenda on
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/agenda-104-dnsop-06

Cheers,

-- Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] extension of DoH to authoritative servers

[Benno Overeinder]

On 12/02/2019 09:34, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 03:56:04PM +0800,
>  zuop...@cnnic.cn  wrote 
>  a message of 546 lines which said:
> 
>> DNSSEC is not necessary anymore
> 
> This is clearly false. DoH provides _channel security_ DNSSEC provides
> _content security_ (or object security). This is a very important
> difference in security (we have JWS even if we have HTTPS, for
> instance).

Indeed, you might want to look at one of the presentations by Willem
Toorop and myself.  In respect of channel security, DoH and DoT with
authenticated TLS are similar.

- RIPE 76 DNS WG
  https://ripe76.ripe.net/presentations/56-sunrise-DoT-sunset-DNSSEC.pdf
  https://ripe76.ripe.net/archives/video/67

- ICANN DNS Symposium 2018

https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/presentation-sunrise-dns-tls-sunset-dnssec-13jul18-en.pdf

- APNIC/RIPE blog post: Sunrise DNS over TLS, sunset DNSSEC?
  https://blog.apnic.net/2018/08/17/sunrise-dns-over-tls-sunset-dnssec/

https://labs.ripe.net/Members/willem_toorop/sunrise-dns-over-tls-sunset-dnssec

-- Benno

-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-song-atr-large-resp

[Benno Overeinder]

The call for acceptance for draft-song-atr-large-resp is closed, and it
is clear that there is insufficient support to adopt the concept as a
DNSOP WG document.

There was some concern about the increased number of packages involved
in a legitimate exchange (half of them being ICMP messages, introducing
other concerns) and that the problem space is too narrow to burden all
resolvers.

We would like to thank the authors and WG participants who responded to
the call for adoption on the mailing list.

Best regards,

-- Benno
DNSOP co-chair


On 18/01/2019 18:55, Benno Overeinder wrote:
> Dear DNSOP WG,
> 
> We discussed this work (draft -01) in Montreal, and different opinions wrt. 
> adoption were expressed.  In the past months, the authors pushed a draft 
> version -02 that addressed and resolved some of these comments.  
> 
> This starts a Call for Adoption for:
> draft-song-atr-large-resp
> 
> The draft is available here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-song-atr-large-resp/
> 
> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by 
> DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.
> 
> Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.  The 
> WG accepts the document or not, but the WG chairs also expect a commitment 
> from the WG participants who support the document to contribute to the draft, 
> review, etc.
> 
> The intended status of the draft is Experimental, but we want to ask 
> developers/vendors if they plan to implement it.   
> 
> This call for adoption ends: 1 February 2019
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Benno Overeinder
> DNSOP co-chair
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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

Re: [DNSOP] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-arnt-yao-dnsop-root-data-caching-00.txt

[Benno Overeinder]

> On 14 Feb 2019, at 16:12, Warren Kumari  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 8:59 AM Tony Finch  wrote:
> Jiankang Yao  wrote:
> >
> >A new draft about root data caching is proposed, which aims to solve
> >the similar problem presented in RFC7706 and gives the DNS
> >administrator one more option.
> 
> How does this relate to:
> 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wkumari-dnsop-hammer
> 
> ... and our plan is to still (in our copious free time!) update this to 
> simplify it, and update it to be more of a "this is how implementations have 
> implemented this" -- the document is close to cooked, and we'd dearly love a 
> short bit from implementers describing how they did it…
> 



Noted.

— Benno


-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

[DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc2845bis

[Benno Overeinder]

The authors of draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc2845bis recently posted a new version
-05 to the DNSOP WG mailing list.

>From the feedback on the mailing list, the chairs believe that all
feedback and comments have been addressed by the authors, either in the
draft or on the mailing list.

This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc2845bis

Current versions of the draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc2845bis/

The Current Intended Status of this document is: Internet Standard

Please review the draft and provide relevant comments.

If someone feels the document is *not* ready for publication, please
speak out with your reasons.

This starts a Working Group Last Call process of three weeks and ends
on: 31 July 2019.


Thanks,

-- Benno

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

[DNSOP] IETF 105 Agenda and Call for Agenda Items DNSOP WG

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

The IETF105 Agenda is out
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/agenda.html and DNSOP has two
sessions

Monday 18:10-19:10  Monday Afternoon session III

Tuesday 10:00-12:00 Tuesday Morning session I

As with the previous IETF meeting, we are planning the shorter (1 hour),
first meeting for newer work that may not have much comment and the
longer, second meeting is initially reserved for already adopted work.


This is also a call for Agenda requests.  Please email the chairs
 with your requests.  *Or* drop us a pull request
https://github.com/DNSOP/dnsop-ietf105 look for
dnsop-ietf105-agenda-requests.txt

Please Note: Draft Submission Deadline is Monday July 8, 2019

Thanks,

Tim
Suzanne
Benno

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

[DNSOP] DNS research presentations during the IETF 105

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear DNSOP WG,

This week there are a number of research presentations during the ANWR
and IRTF sessions.

Monday, July 22
---

Applied Networking Research Workshop,
https://irtf.org/anrw/2019/program.html

10:40-12:00 DNS and Security

Who Is Answering My Queries: Understanding and Characterizing
Interception of the DNS Resolution Path

Oblivious DNS: Practical Privacy for DNS Queries

Analyzing the Costs (and Benefits) of DNS, DoT, and DoH for the Modern Web


Tuesday, July 23


15:20-16:50 Tuesday Afternoon session II
Place du Canada IRTF Open Meeting

16:10 Understanding the Role of Registrars in DNSSEC Deployment (ANRP
Award Talk)
  Taejoong Chung



Cheers,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] Agenda IETF105

[Benno Overeinder]

There is an updated agenda posted on
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/agenda-105-dnsop/

Presenters can submit their slides by using the new upload feature in
datatracker, https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/session/dnsop and
click on "Propose Slides".

Cheers,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno


On 15/07/2019 19:31, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> Hi
> 
> We posted an initial Agenda for DNSOP earlier today (thanks Benno!) 
> which you can find here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/agenda-105-dnsop/
> 
> Make sure we didn't forget someone who asked for a speaking slot. 
> 
> Also, for Presenters - you can save us from badgering you for slides by
> trying the new slide upload feature in the data tracker.   I believe if
> you go here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/session/dnsop
> 
> and click on "Propose Slides" we will receive your gifts.
> 
> Thanks and look forward to seeing all who will be in Montreal!
> 
> Tim
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Call for Adoptions: draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang

[Benno Overeinder]

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 the DNSOP WG room was positive and also previous
discussions on the DNSOP mailing list (dd. 12 November 2018) were also
supportive.

This starts a Call for Adoption for:
draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang

The draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang/

Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption
by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.

Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.

This call for adoption ends: 29 July 2019

Thanks,

Benno Overeinder
DNSOP co-chair

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

Re: [DNSOP] IETF 106 Agenda and Call for Agenda Items DNSOP WG

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear all,

The agenda for the DNSOP WG sessions on Tuesday and Thursday is
published on https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/agenda-106-dnsop/.

We still have a few available slots for new DNSOP work or existing work.
Send the chairs an email or make a pull request (see below).

Thanks,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno


On 28/10/2019 16:25, Benno Overeinder wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> The IETF106 Agenda is out
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/106/agenda.html and DNSOP has two
> sessions:
> 
> Tuesday  17:10-18:40  Tuesday Afternoon session III
> 
> Thursday 13:30-15:30  Thursday Afternoon session I
> 
> As with the previous IETF meetings, we are planning the first meeting
> for work already adopted and the second for newer work.
> 
> Please note, dnsop-svcb-httpssvc has been adopted by DNSOP WG and will
> be scheduled for the Tuesday meeting (besides the httpbis conflict on
> Thursday).
> 
> This is also a call for Agenda requests.  Please email the chairs
>  with your requests.  *Or* drop us a pull request
> https://github.com/DNSOP/wg-materials/tree/master/dnsop-ietf106 look for
> dnsop-ietf106-agenda-requests.txt
> 
> Please Note: Draft Submission Deadline is Monday 4 November 2019
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tim
> Suzanne
> Benno
> 
> ___
> 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

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

[Benno Overeinder]

On 10/7/19 7:31 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2019, Benno Overeinder wrote:
> 
>> Questions to WG:
>>
>> 1) iana-class-type-yang document to OPSAWG?
> 
> I would assume most people here will the same about the document,
> wherever it is discussed ? So this option seems odd.
> 
>> 2) follow-up work on YANG data models for DNS servers in DNSOP?
> 
> Speaking for myself, as long as we are not populating RFCs with
> obsoleted DNS data or just create RFC with copies of IANA registries,
> I'm fine with helping on a document. But not if it is a blind copy
> and paste from IANA (whether at DNSOP or OPSAWG)

After also consulting our AD, we decided to keep the document in DNSOP WG.

After the WG call for adoption on the mailing list (normal procedure),
we also want to ask the WG during the meeting in Singapore to raise
their hands and volunteer for helping the document and for review.  We
want to ensure that enough people in the DNSOP WG are committed to
working on the document.

Thanks,

-- Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-multi-provider-dnssec

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

The WGLC date has passed and we think the draft is in good shape. Still
the chairs would like to see some comments and feedback.  Positive
feedback that the document is ready to go is also fine.

Thanks,

-- Benno

On 31/10/2019 16:47, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> 
> This starts a Working Group Last Call for
> draft-ietf-dnsop-multi-provider-dnssec
> 
> Current versions of the draft is available here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-multi-provider-dnssec/
> 
> The Current Intended Status of this document is: Informational
> 
> FYI, I will not shepherd this document, as it was written with several
> of my coworkers.
> Benno Overeinder will be Document Shepherd. 
> 
> Please review the draft and offer relevant comments.
> If this does not seem appropriate please speak out. 
> If someone feels the document is *not* ready for publication, please
> speak out with your reasons.
> 
> If there are normative issues, agenda time at IETF106 will be set aside
> to address them
> 
> This starts a two week Working Group Last Call process, and ends on:  15
> November 2019
> 
> thanks
> tim
> 
> 
> ___
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
> 


-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

[DNSOP] IETF 106 Agenda and Call for Agenda Items DNSOP WG

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

The IETF106 Agenda is out
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/106/agenda.html and DNSOP has two
sessions:

Tuesday  17:10-18:40Tuesday Afternoon session III

Thursday 13:30-15:30Thursday Afternoon session I

As with the previous IETF meetings, we are planning the first meeting
for work already adopted and the second for newer work.

Please note, dnsop-svcb-httpssvc has been adopted by DNSOP WG and will
be scheduled for the Tuesday meeting (besides the httpbis conflict on
Thursday).

This is also a call for Agenda requests.  Please email the chairs
 with your requests.  *Or* drop us a pull request
https://github.com/DNSOP/wg-materials/tree/master/dnsop-ietf106 look for
dnsop-ietf106-agenda-requests.txt

Please Note: Draft Submission Deadline is Monday 4 November 2019

Thanks,

Tim
Suzanne
Benno

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

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

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi Normen and DNSOP working group,

On 02/10/2019 22:10, Normen B. Kowalewski wrote:
> Is there is still any open issue that keeps people from seeing the reuse of
> the general purpose DNS definitinons in the IANA registry in a formal model
> and by YANG as useful enough for supporting adotion?

The chairs have discussed options to proceed with the draft.  There was
some support for adoption from the DNSOP WG, but not much.  We do want
to have sufficient support in the WG, and the commitment of people to
review and contribute to the draft.

Alternatively we can ask OPSAWG to adopt the draft.  Other NETCONF/YANG
documents have previously been adopted by OPSAWG and we can request an
early review of the document.

The following question is very relevant for follow-up work, namely
whether the DNSOP WG would be interested in the further development of
YANG data models for DNS servers or other devices (for example those for
DNS telemetry).

Operators in DNSOP WG, please speak-up that this is something that
operators need and ask for.

Obviously DNSOP expertise would certainly be needed in this case, and
the proper place is DNSOP WG.

Questions to WG:

1) iana-class-type-yang document to OPSAWG?

2) follow-up work on YANG data models for DNS servers in DNSOP?


Best regards,

-- Benno


> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: DNSOP [mailto:dnsop-boun...@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Normen Kowalewski
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 23. Juli 2019 00:04
> An: Ladislav Lhotka
> Cc: Benno Overeinder; DNSOP WG
> Betreff: 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 the
> IETF 103 and IETF 104. During the IETF 104 meeting, the authors asked for
> adoption by the DNSOP WG.  The feedback from the DNSOP WG room was positive
> and also previous discussions on the DNSOP mailing list (dd. 12 November
> 2018) were also supportive. This starts a Call for Adoption for:
> draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang The draft is available here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang/
> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by
> DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.
>>
>> As a co-author, I support the adoption.
>>
>> Thanks, Lada
>>> Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, 
>>> etc. This call for adoption ends: 29 July 2019 Thanks, Benno 
>>> Overeinder DNSOP co-chair 
>>> ___ DNSOP mailing list 
>>> DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>>
>> --
>> Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
>>
>> ___
>> 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
> 


-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc2845bis

[Benno Overeinder]

Belated thanks for your feedback.

I will proceed with the authors for the next step to submit the draft to
the IESG for publication.

Best,

-- Benno


On 10/07/2019 23:41, bert hubert wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:56:26PM +0200, Benno Overeinder wrote:
>> >From the feedback on the mailing list, the chairs believe that all
>> feedback and comments have been addressed by the authors, either in the
>> draft or on the mailing list.
> 
> With tremendous apologies for not spending a second on this draft earlier, I
> do miss one sentence.  But first, let me state that I (and the camel) are
> elated that this draft actually obsoletes documents and doesn't add
> substantially to the pagecount, or might even reduce it (!).
> 
> The sentence I miss comes after this first paragraph:
> 
>TSIG was originally specified by [RFC2845].  In 2017, two nameservers
>strictly following that document (and the related [RFC4635]) were
>discovered to have security problems related to this feature.  The
>implementations were fixed but, to avoid similar problems in the
>future, the two documents were updated and merged, producing this
>revised specification for TSIG.
> 
>While TSIG implemented according to this RFC provides for enhanced
>security, there are no changes in interoperability. TSIG is on the wire
>still the same mechanism, only checking semantics have been changed.
>Please see section 10.1 for further details.
> 
> Rationale for this new paragraph is that it will save like 1 questions
> on if this TSIG is compatible with the old TSIG, or if software X implements
> RFC9xxx TSIG or the old one, and if there is fallback etc.
> 
> I fully realize how late my suggestion is.
> 
>> This starts a Working Group Last Call process of three weeks and ends
>> on: 31 July 2019.
> 
> I'm very much in favour of this cleanup and I applaud the authors for doing
> the hard work to make it happen.
> 
>   Bert
> 
> ___
> 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

Re: [DNSOP] status of the aname and svcb/httpsvc drafts

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi Karl,

On 2/20/20 10:31 AM, Klaus Malorny wrote:
> thanks all for responding, this was very informative for me. The lack of
> interest for the ANAME draft is a bit pity. We have some customer
> requests in this direction and I was hoping to be able to offer them a
> standards compliant solution. So now I have to rethink our strategy.

I am interested to learn what the problem is that the customer wants to
solve.  Quoting from the email from Evan Hunt in this thread: "CNAME at
the apex wasn't really the problem.  Getting browsers to display
content from the right CDN server was the problem."

If there is a specific use case for CNAME in the APEX (ANAME), I am
really interested to learn from this.

Thanks,

-- Benno

-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

Re: [DNSOP] Domain Name System Operations (dnsop) WG Virtual Meeting: 2020-04-14

[Benno Overeinder]

The Webex room will open at 13:45 UTC.

https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=m706bba8b48e3db3db02d72f0941b2630

If you enter the Webex room number directly:
Meeting number: 614 651 353
Password: VBvPM2NYR43

See you in 40 minutes,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno


On 07/04/2020 16:18, IESG Secretary wrote:
> The Domain Name System Operations (dnsop) Working Group will hold
> a virtual interim meeting on 2020-04-14 from 16:00 to 18:00 Europe/Amsterdam 
> (14:00 to 16:00 UTC).
> 
> Agenda:
> # DNS Operations (DNSOP) Working Group
> ## IETF 107
> 
> * Date: April 14, 2020
> * Time: 14:00 UTC
> * Webex: 
> https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=m706bba8b48e3db3db02d72f0941b2630
> 
> ###
> * Jabber:  
> * EtherPad: <https://etherpad.ietf.org:9009/p/interim-2020-dnsop-01>
> 
> ### Chairs
> * Tim Wicinski 
> * Suzanne Woolf 
> * Benno Overeinder 
> 
> ### IESG Overlord
> * Warren Kumari 
> 
> ### Document Status
> * <https://github.com/DNSOP/wg-materials/blob/master/dnsop-document-status.md>
> 
> ### Datatracker
> * <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/dnsop/documents/>
> 
> # Agenda
> 
> ## Administrivia
> * Agenda Bashing, Blue Sheets, etc,  10 min
> * Updates of Old Work, Chairs, 10 min
> 
> ## Current Working Group Business
> 
> ###  Service binding and parameter specification via the DNS
> - <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-httpssvc/>
> - Eric Nygren, 15 min
> - Chairs Action: ?
> 
> ### DNS Query Name Minimisation to Improve Privacy (bis)
> - <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7816bis/>
> - Ralph Dolmans, 15min
> - Chairs Action: How close to WGLC?
> 
> 
> #
> ## New Working Group Business
> 
> ### Avoid IP fragmentation in DNS
> - 
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fujiwara-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation/>
> - Kazunori Fujiwara, 15 min
> - Chairs Action: Adopt?
> 
> ### The Delegation_Only DNSKEY flag
> - <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pwouters-powerbind-03>
> - Paul Wouters, 10 min
> - Chairs Action: Adopt?
> 
> ### Parameterized Nameserver Delegation with NS2 and NS2T
> - <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tapril-ns2/>
> - Tim April, 15 min
> - Chairs Action:
> 
> ### DNS Catalog Zones
> - <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-toorop-dnsop-dns-catalog-zones/>
> - Willem Toorop, 15 min
> - Chairs Action:
> 
> ### A Data Model for configuring Domain Name System (DNS) Zone Provisioning 
> on Authoritative Nameservers
> - 
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-toorop-dnsop-dns-zone-provisioning-yang/>
> - Willem Toorop, 15 min
> - Chairs Action:
> 
> #
> ## Reference
> 
> ### BlueSheets
> 
> Attendees are asked to visit and enter your Name+Affiliation in the 
> Blue-Sheet section of the DNSOP Etherpad.
> 
> ### Mic Line Queue
> 
> The Mic Line will use the WebEx chat channel.  To get in the queue type q+ to 
> leave type q-.
> Please don’t type questions or other things into the WebEx chat channel as 
> that will make
> managing the queue very hard for the chairs.  Please use the Jabber channel 
> for side conversations.
>  
> When you connect into WebEx you should start off as auto-muted so you’ll
> need to unmute yourself to speak when called.
> 
> ### Helpful Info & Prep
> 
> The IETF has prepared a couple of documents to help get everyone ready,
> including a reminder that you need to register for IETF107 as a remote 
> participant to join remotely.
>  
>   <https://www.ietf.org/how/meetings/107/session-participant-guide/>
>  
>   <https://www.ietf.org/how/meetings/107/session-presenter-guide/>
> 
> Information about remote participation:
> https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=m706bba8b48e3db3db02d72f0941b2630
> 
> ___
> 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

Re: [DNSOP] Domain Name System Operations (dnsop) WG Virtual Meeting: 2020-04-23

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear DNSOP WG,

We have added another agenda item to our interim meeting next Thursday:

### Use of GOST 2012 Signature Algorithms in DNSKEY and RRSIG Resource
Records for DNSSEC
- https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-belyavskiy-rfc5933-bis/
- Dmitry Belyavsky, 15min
- Chairs Action:

The interim meeting therefore most likely runs until 16:15 UTC.

You can add the DNSOP virtual interim meeting to your calendar:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2020-dnsop-02/sessions/dnsop.ics

See also https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/dnsop/meetings/

Best regards,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno


On 17/04/2020 15:57, IESG Secretary wrote:
> The Domain Name System Operations (dnsop) Working Group will hold
> a virtual interim meeting on 2020-04-23 from 17:00 to 18:00 Europe/Amsterdam 
> (15:00 to 16:00 UTC).
> 
> Agenda:
> # DNS Operations (DNSOP) Working Group
> ## interim-2020-dnsop-02
> 
> * Date: 23 April 2020
> * Time: 
> * Webex: 
> 
> ###
> * Jabber:  dn...@jabber.ietf.org
> * EtherPad:
> 
> ### Chairs
> * Tim Wicinski tjw.i...@gmail.com
> * Suzanne Woolf suzworldw...@gmail.com
> * Benno Overeinder be...@nlnetlabs.nl
> 
> ### IESG Overlord
> * Warren Kumari war...@kumari.net
> 
> ### Document Status
> * https://github.com/DNSOP/wg-materials/blob/master/dnsop-document-status.md
> 
> ### Datatracker
> * https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/dnsop/documents/
> 
> # Agenda
> 
> ## Administrivia
> * Agenda Bashing, Blue Sheets, etc, 5 min
> 
> ## Current Working Group Business
> 
> ### YANG Types for DNS Classes and Resource Record Types
> - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang/
> - Ladislav Lhotka, 10 min
> - Chairs Action:
> 
> ### Interoperable Domain Name System (DNS) Server Cookies
> - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-server-cookies/
> - Willem Toorop, 15min
> - Chairs Action: How close to WGLC?
> 
> 
> #
> ## New Working Group Business
> 
> ### DNS TIMEOUT Resource Record
> - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pusateri-dnsop-update-timeout/
> - Tom Pusateri/Tim Wattenberg, 15 min
> - Chairs Action: Adopt?
> 
> ### Delegation Revalidation by DNS Resolvers
> - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-huque-dnsop-ns-revalidation/
> - Shumon Huque, 15 min
> - Chairs Action: 
> 
> 
> #
> ## Reference
> 
> ### BlueSheets
> 
> Attendees are asked to visit and enter your Name+Affiliation in the 
> Blue-Sheet section of the DNSOP Etherpad.
> 
> ### Mic Line Queue
> 
> The Mic Line will use the WebEx chat channel.  To get in the queue type q+ to 
> leave type q-.
> Please don't type questions or other things into the WebEx chat channel as 
> that will make
> managing the queue very hard for the chairs.  Please use the Jabber channel 
> for side conversations.
> 
> When you connect into WebEx you should start off as auto-muted so you'll
> need to unmute yourself to speak when called.
> 
> ### Helpful Info & Prep
> 
> The IETF has prepared a couple of documents to help get everyone ready.
> 
>   https://www.ietf.org/how/meetings/107/session-participant-guide/
> 
>   https://www.ietf.org/how/meetings/107/session-presenter-guide/
> 
> Information about remote participation:
> https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=m8d49e59807a47eec1d8cf5fbd4f81fa3
> 
> ___
> 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

Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP WG interim 14 April 2020

[Benno Overeinder]

Still 12 hours to fill in the doodle!

https://doodle.com/poll/w7d6vvbvswtt47ry

(And another 6 hours before CET working day starts.)

Thanks!

-- Benno


On 03/04/2020 17:58, Benno Overeinder wrote:
> Gentle reminder to the working group.
> 
> Please fill in the doodle before Monday April 6th, end of day (UTC).
> 
> https://doodle.com/poll/w7d6vvbvswtt47ry
> 
> Best,
> 
> -- Benno
> 
> 
> On 02/04/2020 01:55, Benno Overeinder wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As Suzanne mentioned in the email of March 22, the IESG has set up a
>> schedule for virtual interim meetings,
>> https://trac.ietf.org/trac/wgchairs/raw-attachment/wiki/WikiStart/April2020-RecommendedSchedule.pdf
>>
>> Two sessions are planned for the DNSOP WG:
>> - 14 April
>> - 23 April
>>
>> The DNSOP WG session on April 14 lasts 2 hours and is already fully
>> scheduled with queued presentations, see
>> https://github.com/DNSOP/wg-materials/tree/master/dnsop-ietf107.
>>
>> The session of April 23 is scheduled for 1 hour and is available for new
>> work in particular.  If you want to reserve a presentation slot, please
>> reach out to the co-chairs or send a pull request directly (see URL
>> above to GitHub repository).
>>
>> Like our DPRIVE colleagues/co-chairs (one of them is also co-chair
>> here!), we want the participants of the April 14 meeting to indicate
>> their preference for a time period in the following poll:
>>
>> https://doodle.com/poll/w7d6vvbvswtt47ry
>>
>> We choose potential times based on what we know about the active
>> participants in the WG.  They are not ideal for everyone, but hopefully
>> accommodates a majority.
>>
>> *Please provide your response to the poll by Monday (April 4).*
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Suzanne, Tim and Benno
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [DNSOP] Doodle poll for DNSOP WG interim 23 April 2020

[Benno Overeinder]

Gentle reminder.  Poll closes today.

https://doodle.com/poll/zk9f4ur7fycz3kra

Thank you,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno


On 14/04/2020 18:26, Benno Overeinder wrote:
> Dear DNSOP WG,
> 
> Thank you for your time and participation in the DNSOP WG meeting today.
> 
> The next DNSOP WG interim meeting is scheduled for April 23 and will be
> a one hour virtual meeting.  To select a timeslot, we again created a
> doodle poll:
> 
> https://doodle.com/poll/zk9f4ur7fycz3kra
> 
> Please fill in the doodle before the end of Thursday (April 16).
> 
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Suzanne, Tim and Benno
> 
> ___
> 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

Re: [DNSOP] Doodle poll for DNSOP WG interim 23 April 2020

[Benno Overeinder]

The DNSOP WG interim meeting on April 23 is scheduled for 15:00-16:00 UTC.

Details about agenda, webex, etherpad will soon be posted to the mailing
list.

Best regards,

-- Benno


On 16/04/2020 10:18, Benno Overeinder wrote:
> Gentle reminder.  Poll closes today.
> 
> https://doodle.com/poll/zk9f4ur7fycz3kra
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Suzanne, Tim and Benno
> 
> 
> On 14/04/2020 18:26, Benno Overeinder wrote:
>> Dear DNSOP WG,
>>
>> Thank you for your time and participation in the DNSOP WG meeting today.
>>
>> The next DNSOP WG interim meeting is scheduled for April 23 and will be
>> a one hour virtual meeting.  To select a timeslot, we again created a
>> doodle poll:
>>
>> https://doodle.com/poll/zk9f4ur7fycz3kra
>>
>> Please fill in the doodle before the end of Thursday (April 16).
>>
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Suzanne, Tim and Benno
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP at IETF 107: call for agenda items and key dates

[Benno Overeinder]

On 14/03/2020 01:38, Paul Vixie wrote:
> since the meeting is now virtual, could we get an extension on the draft 
> cutoff for updates?

That sounds reasonable.  The IESG recommended the virtual DNSOP meeting
in April (two sessions on two dates).  It is a recommendation, but the
IESG has made an effort to avoid conflicts, etc., in the proposed schedule.

We will update the DNSOP WG in the coming days.

Regards,

-- Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP WG interim 14 April 2020

[Benno Overeinder]

Gentle reminder to the working group.

Please fill in the doodle before Monday April 6th, end of day (UTC).

https://doodle.com/poll/w7d6vvbvswtt47ry

Best,

-- Benno


On 02/04/2020 01:55, Benno Overeinder wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> As Suzanne mentioned in the email of March 22, the IESG has set up a
> schedule for virtual interim meetings,
> https://trac.ietf.org/trac/wgchairs/raw-attachment/wiki/WikiStart/April2020-RecommendedSchedule.pdf
> 
> Two sessions are planned for the DNSOP WG:
> - 14 April
> - 23 April
> 
> The DNSOP WG session on April 14 lasts 2 hours and is already fully
> scheduled with queued presentations, see
> https://github.com/DNSOP/wg-materials/tree/master/dnsop-ietf107.
> 
> The session of April 23 is scheduled for 1 hour and is available for new
> work in particular.  If you want to reserve a presentation slot, please
> reach out to the co-chairs or send a pull request directly (see URL
> above to GitHub repository).
> 
> Like our DPRIVE colleagues/co-chairs (one of them is also co-chair
> here!), we want the participants of the April 14 meeting to indicate
> their preference for a time period in the following poll:
> 
> https://doodle.com/poll/w7d6vvbvswtt47ry
> 
> We choose potential times based on what we know about the active
> participants in the WG.  They are not ideal for everyone, but hopefully
> accommodates a majority.
> 
> *Please provide your response to the poll by Monday (April 4).*
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Suzanne, Tim and Benno
> 
> ___
> 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] DNSOP WG interim 14 April 2020

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

As Suzanne mentioned in the email of March 22, the IESG has set up a
schedule for virtual interim meetings,
https://trac.ietf.org/trac/wgchairs/raw-attachment/wiki/WikiStart/April2020-RecommendedSchedule.pdf

Two sessions are planned for the DNSOP WG:
- 14 April
- 23 April

The DNSOP WG session on April 14 lasts 2 hours and is already fully
scheduled with queued presentations, see
https://github.com/DNSOP/wg-materials/tree/master/dnsop-ietf107.

The session of April 23 is scheduled for 1 hour and is available for new
work in particular.  If you want to reserve a presentation slot, please
reach out to the co-chairs or send a pull request directly (see URL
above to GitHub repository).

Like our DPRIVE colleagues/co-chairs (one of them is also co-chair
here!), we want the participants of the April 14 meeting to indicate
their preference for a time period in the following poll:

https://doodle.com/poll/w7d6vvbvswtt47ry

We choose potential times based on what we know about the active
participants in the WG.  They are not ideal for everyone, but hopefully
accommodates a majority.

*Please provide your response to the poll by Monday (April 4).*

Regards,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

[DNSOP] DNSOP WG interim meeting 23 April 2020 details

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear all,

The DNSOP WG interim meeting details for today (23 April):

* Date: 23 April 2020
* Time: 1500 - 1600 UTC

* Webex:
https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=m8d49e59807a47eec1d8cf5fbd4f81fa3
* Jabber:  dn...@jabber.ietf.org
* EtherPad:
https://etherpad.ietf.org/p/notes-ietf-interim-2020-dnsop-02?useMonospaceFont=true

* Meeting materials:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2020-dnsop-02/session/dnsop

Best regards,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

[DNSOP] Webex recordings of DNSOP WG Interim Meeting 2020-04-14 and 2020-04-23

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear DNSOP WG,

The Webex recordings of our DNSOP WG meetings interim-2020-dnsop-01 and
interim-2020-dnsop-02, on 14 April 2020 and 23 April 2020 respectively,
have been published on the IETF YouTube channel.

14 April 2020: https://youtu.be/-AI02ip4pQE
23 April 2020: https://youtu.be/mz_Ema8dPnQ

Best regards,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

[DNSOP] Doodle poll for DNSOP WG interim 23 April 2020

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear DNSOP WG,

Thank you for your time and participation in the DNSOP WG meeting today.

The next DNSOP WG interim meeting is scheduled for April 23 and will be
a one hour virtual meeting.  To select a timeslot, we again created a
doodle poll:

https://doodle.com/poll/zk9f4ur7fycz3kra

Please fill in the doodle before the end of Thursday (April 16).


Thank you,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] Geoip log implement help

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear Shubham Goyal,

The DNSOP WG mailing list is intended for IETF DNSOP (related)
discussions about Internet drafts and RFCs.

Your question about GeoIP and BIND should be better directed to the
mailing list of BIND users,
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users.  There you will find
excellent support from the community for your questions.

Kind regards,

Benno Overeinder
DNSOP WG co-chair


On 09/09/2020 05:43, ShubhamGoyal wrote:
>  
>>  
>> Dear sir,
>>    We are running a public DNS
>> resolver in Centos 8 with bind software . We enable geoip feature at
>> configuration time now I want to know about
>>  
>>   " How can we implement
>> Geo log in bind Recursive Resolver"
>>     Thanks
>> Best Regards,
>> Shubham Goyal
>> Cyber Security Group
>> Centre for Development of Advanced Computing
>> Bangalore
>>  
> 
> 150th Anniversary Mahatma Gandhi
> 
> 
> 
> [ C-DAC is on Social-Media too. Kindly follow us at:
> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CDACINDIA & Twitter: @cdacindia ]
> 
> This e-mail is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
> contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy
> all copies and the original message. Any unauthorized review, use,
> disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email
> is strictly prohibited and appropriate legal action will be taken.
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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

Re: [DNSOP] Another week ... Re: Conclusion on call for adoption of draft-arends-private-use-tld?

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear Roy,

The DNSOP chairs are currently reaching out to the IAB to discuss this
document with the ICANN Liaison.  We are following the liaison process,
and once we hear back, we will inform the working group.

Kind regards,

-- Benno


On 04/09/2020 12:19, Roy Arends wrote:
> Pretty please?
> 
> Please with a cherry on top?
> 
> Roy
> 
>> On 28 Aug 2020, at 14:30, Roy Arends  wrote:
>>
>> Dear WG chairs,
>>
>> More than two months have passed after the call for adoption for 
>> draft-arends-private-use-tld has ended. I believe I counted 16 individuals 
>> who explicitly supported the adoption (excluding myself), and 5 against 
>> adoption. IMHO, a threshold for adoption has been reached, wouldn’t you 
>> agree?
>>
>> I have asked you individually for updates, but I don’t have a clear 
>> commitment.
>>
>> The ask was simple, the commitment from the WG was clear. 
>>
>> Can we please get this moving forward?
>>
>> Warmly,
>>
>> Roy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> ___
> 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] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang

[Benno Overeinder]

This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang.

Current versions of the draft are available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang/

The Current Intended Status of this document is: Standards Track

Benno Overeinder will be Document Shepherd. 

The authors have incorporated the comments of the working group in their latest 
revision -05.  The chairs would like to thank Paul Wouters for his input during 
the various versions of the Internet Draft.

Please review the draft and offer relevant comments.
If this does not seem appropriate please speak out. 
If someone feels the document is *not* ready for publication, please speak out 
with your reasons.
Supporting statements that the document is ready are also welcome.

This starts a two week Working Group Last Call process, and ends on:  30 
October 2020.

Thanks,

— Benno

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

[DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-server-cookies

[Benno Overeinder]

This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-server-cookies.

Current versions of the draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-server-cookies/

The Current Intended Status of this document is: Standards Track

FYI, I will not shepherd this document, as it was written with one of my 
coworkers.
Tim Wicinski will be Document Shepherd. 

Please review the draft and offer relevant comments.
If this does not seem appropriate please speak out. 
If someone feels the document is *not* ready for publication, please speak out 
with your reasons.

Implementations of dnsop-server-cookies are available in Bind and Knot DNS, and 
for NSD and Unbound they are almost ready.

This starts a two week Working Group Last Call process, and ends on:  23 
October 2020.

Thanks,

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

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-server-cookies

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear WG,

The WGLC period for draft-ietf-dnsop-server cookies has finished.  There are 
editorial comments that the authors have already addressed. The chairs feel 
that the draft is ready to move forward.

Thanks for the reviews,

— Benno


> On 12 Oct 2020, at 11:47, Willem Toorop  wrote:
> 
> Thanks Brian,
> 
> All but one nit resolved in these commits:
> 
> *
> https://github.com/NLnetLabs/draft-sury-toorop-dns-cookies-algorithms/commit/db51181a
> *
> https://github.com/NLnetLabs/draft-sury-toorop-dns-cookies-algorithms/commit/e1e763e8
> 
> For your convenience, a rendered possible future version of the document
> with these changes can be viewed here:
> 
> *
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/NLnetLabs/draft-sury-toorop-dns-cookies-algorithms/master/draft-ietf-dnsop-server-cookies-04.txt
> 
> I've provided a bit more feedback inline below.
> 
> Op 10-10-2020 om 23:13 schreef Brian Dickson:
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 8:38 AM Benno Overeinder > <mailto:be...@nlnetlabs.nl>> wrote:
>> 
>>This starts a Working Group Last Call for
>>draft-ietf-dnsop-server-cookies.
>> 
>>Current versions of the draft is available here:
>>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-server-cookies/
>> 
>>The Current Intended Status of this document is: Standards Track
>> 
>>FYI, I will not shepherd this document, as it was written with one
>>of my coworkers.
>>Tim Wicinski will be Document Shepherd.
>> 
>>Please review the draft and offer relevant comments.
>>If this does not seem appropriate please speak out.
>>If someone feels the document is *not* ready for publication, please
>>speak out with your reasons.
>> 
>> 
>> I have read the document, and support publication (modulo very minor
>> nits that should be fixed).
>> 
>> In addition to these nits, I do have one further suggestion for Section 8.
>> 
>> I'm not sure if it is too late to make such a suggestion, but on reading
>> (and thinking about) the spec,
>> it could be useful guidance (particularly for clients which may not be
>> aware of changes to their Client-IP address):
>> 
>> "o   In order to determine that a Server has detected a change to the
>> Client-IP, a Client may consider
>>   a BADCOOKIE error sooner than would be expected from a Server
>> Cookie refresh as a signal
>>   that the Client-IP may have changed, and thus that a new Client
>> Cookie should be created for each Server."
> 
> This is too late. For privacy reasons, the server should not be able to
> discover that the Client-IP changed so it cannot *track* Clients with
> the help of a DNS Cookie.  The Client needs to detect source address
> changes before it uses it to send out queries.
> 
>> 
>> Nits:
>> Introduction - I believe "provides" should be "provide", to agree with
>> the singular "is" of the verb. (Sorry, grammar nit.)
>> 
>> Section 1.1 - I believe all the "Section Section" instances should
>> really just be "Section".
>> 
>> Section 4 - "too frequent" -> "too frequently". 
>> 
>> Section 4.3 - "in the anycast." -> "in the anycast set."
>> 
>> Section 4.4 - hash calculation, end of first line "Client-IP," ->
>> "Client-IP |"
> 
> (from Wikipedia)
> SipHash is not actually a cryptographic hash, bot only suitable as
> message authentication code: a keyed hash function like HMAC.
> 
> It has the form SipHash(message, key)
> 
> Thanks,
> -- Willem
> 
>> 
>> Section 5 - "anycast group" -> "anycast set"; "us used" -> "is used"
>> 
>> Section 8 - "like for example five minute." -> "for example five minutes."
>> 
>> Brian
>> 
>> ___
>> 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

-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

Re: [DNSOP] Time for WGLC?

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi Ben,

> On 15 Jul 2020, at 00:38, Ben Schwartz  
> wrote:
> 
> Oh, and regardless, we would like some agenda time.

Thanks, we reserve a slot for the draft.

> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 2:19 PM Ben Schwartz  wrote:
> DNSOP chairs,
> 
> SVCB/HTTPS draft-01 has incorporated a lot of feedback, and I think it's 
> really in good shape (apart from "TODO REMOVE" sections)..  There are several 
> implementations in development.  Is it time to start a WGLC?
> 

The draft is indeed in good shape.  The DNSOP chairs will be meeting 
(virtually) soon and will discuss the start of the WGLC.

Best regards,

— Benno

--
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

[DNSOP] Fwd: Nomcom 2020-2021 Second Call For Volunteers

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear DNSOP WG,

The NomCom Chair has just send a second call for volunteers for the
NomCom 2020-2021.  Consider stepping forward and indicating that you are
available for the 2020-2021 NomCom.


Best regards,

-- Benno



 Forwarded Message 
Subject: Nomcom 2020-2021 Second Call For Volunteers
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 11:54:56 -0700
From: NomCom Chair 2020 
To: IETF Announcement List 
CC: i...@ietf.org

This is the second sending of the call for volunteers for the 2020-2021
NomCom.

I wanted to mention a few updates from the previous email (sent 2 weeks
ago):
 - I've fixed the URL at the bottom of the email to point to
https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2020/ instead of /2019/. This was a
test to see if anyone was paying attention. Apparently, some people were. ;)
 - The IETF 108 registration form includes a checkbox that will let you
volunteer. You can use this instead of emailing me, when you register
for IETF 108.
 - I currently have 39 volunteers. Last year had 149. I need more
volunteers!
-
The IETF NomCom appoints people to fill the open slots on the LLC, IETF
Trust, the IAB, and the IESG.

Ten voting members for the NomCom are selected in a verifiably random
way from a pool of volunteers. The more volunteers, the better chance we
have of choosing a random yet representative cross section of the IETF
population.

The details of the operation of the NomCom can be found in BCP 10 (RFC
8713). RFC 3797 details the selection algorithm.

Special for this year (and only this year), we also have RFC 8788
(one-off update to RFC 8713 / BCP 10) to tell us who is eligible to
volunteer:

  Members of the IETF community must have attended at least three of
  the last five in-person IETF meetings in order to volunteer.

  The five meetings are the five most recent in-person meetings that
  ended prior to the date on which the solicitation for NomCom
  volunteers was submitted for distribution to the IETF community.
  Because no IETF 107 in-person meeting was held, for the 2020-2021
  Nominating Committee those five meetings are IETFs
102 [Montreal, Canada; July 2018],
103 [Bangkok, Thailand; November 2018],
104 [Prague, Czech Republic; March 2019],
105 [Montreal, Canada; July 2019], and 106 [Singapore;
November 2019].

Keep in mind that eligibility is based on in-person attendance at the
five listed meetings. You can check your eligibility at:
https://www.ietf.org/registration/nomcom.py.

If you qualify, please volunteer. Before you decide to volunteer, please
remember that anyone appointed to this NomCom will not be considered as
a candidate for any of the positions that the 2020 - 2021 NomCom is
responsible for filling.

People commonly volunteer by ticking the box on IETF registration forms.
The IETF 106 form did not ask whether people were willing to volunteer.
IETF 107 did ask, but all those registrations were canceled. I have
asked the Secretariat if it is possible to get the list if volunteers
from canceled IETF 107 registrations. If that list is available, I will
contact all who are verified as eligible. But given the uncertainty of
this process, I would encourage people to volunteer directly (see the
bottom of this email for instructions). Thank you for volunteering!

The list of people and posts whose terms end with the March 2021 IETF
meeting, and thus the positions for which this NomCom is responsible, are

IETF Trust:
Joel Halpern

LLC:
Maja Andjelkovic

IAB:
Jari Arkko
Jeff Tantsura
Mark Nottingham
Stephen Farrell
Wes Hardaker
Zhenbin Li

IESG:
Alissa Cooper, IETF Chair/GEN AD
Alvaro Retana, RTG AD
Barry Leiba, ART AD
Deborah Brungard, RTG AD
Éric Vyncke, INT AD
Magnus Westerlund, TSV AD
Roman Danyliw, SEC AD
Warren Kumari, OPS AD

All appointments are for 2 years. The Routing area has 3 ADs and the
General area has 1; all other areas have 2 ADs. Thus, all areas (that
have more than one AD) have at least one continuing AD.

The primary activity for this NomCom will begin in July 2020 and should
be completed in January 2021.  The NomCom will have regularly scheduled
conference calls to ensure progress. There will be activities to collect
requirements from the community, review candidate questionnaires, review
feedback from community members about candidates, and talk to candidates.

While being a NomCom member does require some time commitment it is also
a very rewarding experience.

As a member of the NomCom it is very important that you be willing and
able to attend either videoconference or in-person meetings (which may
not happen) during 14-20 November (IETF 109 - Bangkok) to conduct
interviews. Videoconference attendance will be supported whether or not
there are in-person meetings. Orientation and setting of the NomCom
schedule will be done by videoconference during the 

Re: [DNSOP] Implementation status for ZONEMD?

[Benno Overeinder]

On 22/12/2020 10:27, Willem Toorop wrote:

Recently, also the ldns library has been extended with zone-digest
functionality. ZONEMD RRs can now be calculated and added with
ldns-signzone , and verified with ldns-verify-zone .
This is available on the develop branch on

https://github.com/NLnetLabs/ldns

this will also be released early next year.


With ZONEMD verification in ldns-verify-zone, and CreDNS zone 
verification mechanism in NSD, there is also support for ZONEMD 
verification in NSD (not signing!).  With a zone transfer (inbound), 
NSD/CreDNS verifies the zone integrity using ldns-verify-zone.  Only if 
the zone is correct will the zone be transferred (outbound) to (public) 
secondary name servers.


See also the IETF 109 DNSOP WG presentation of Willem: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/109/materials/slides-109-dnsop-sessb-dns-hackathon-results-00.


Best,

-- Benno

--
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

Re: [DNSOP] Implementation status for ZONEMD?

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi,

On 22/12/2020 01:07, Benno Overeinder wrote:

Hi Paul,

On 18/12/2020 22:57, Paul Hoffman wrote:
Greetings. Now that ZONEMD is waiting in the RFC Editor's queue, I was 
wondering how the developers are coming with implementation. The 
protocol is ripe for two-party testing.




We have implemented ZONEMD (verification and DNSSEC validation) in 
Unbound, ready to be merged into the main branch and released early next 
year.


Forgot to mention that we tested this with the implementation by Duane 
Wessels, as mentioned in the draft Appendix B.1.  Note that this 
implementation differs from the implementation that Willem mentioned in 
his email to the mailing list.


Cheers,

-- Benno

--
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

Re: [DNSOP] Implementation status for ZONEMD?

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi Paul,

On 18/12/2020 22:57, Paul Hoffman wrote:

Greetings. Now that ZONEMD is waiting in the RFC Editor's queue, I was 
wondering how the developers are coming with implementation. The protocol is 
ripe for two-party testing.




We have implemented ZONEMD (verification and DNSSEC validation) in 
Unbound, ready to be merged into the main branch and released early next 
year.



Cheers,

-- Benno

--
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear WG,

The WGLC period for draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang has finished.

From the comments on the mailing list of DNSOP participants who 
contributed and/or provided feedback on the document, I conclude that 
the authors have included and processed their comments.


The chairs feel that the draft is ready to move forward.

Thanks for the reviews,

— Benno



On 16/10/2020 15:49, Paul Wouters wrote:

On Fri, 16 Oct 2020, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:


https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang/


This looks good to me.

One minor item. Is it possible to add text in a way that instructs
implementer they SHOULD NOT add "Obsolete" entries when populating?


I think we need to assume that an implementer is familiar with the 
YANG spec, and this is just one of the rules to follow. Specifically, 
RFC 7950 says:


  o  "obsolete" means that the definition is obsolete and SHOULD NOT be
 implemented and/or can be removed from implementations.

This should IMO be sufficient and we needn't repeat in in this document.


Ah yes. And 7950 is referenced in the introduction, so I guess that
should be enough.

Thanks,

Paul

___
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] IETF 109 Agenda and Call for Agenda Items DNSOP WG

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

The IETF109 Agenda is out https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/109/agenda.html.

DNSOP has two sessions scheduled:

   dnsop Session 1 (2:00)
   Tuesday, 17 November 2020, Session I 05:00-07:00 UTC
   Room Name: Room 4 size: 504
   -
   dnsop Session 2 (1:00)
   Friday, 20 November 2020, Session II 07:30-08:30 UTC
   Room Name: Room 4 size: 504
   -


This is also a Call for Agenda Items.  Please email the chairs 
 with your requests.  *Or* drop us a pull request 
https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/wg-materials/tree/main/dnsop-ietf109 look for 
dnsop-ietf109-agenda-requests.md.

Please Note: Draft Submission Deadline is Monday 2 November 2020.

See https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/important-dates/:
* 2020-11-02 (Monday): Internet Draft submission cut-off (for all drafts, 
including -00) by UTC 23:59. Upload using the ID Submission Tool. 


Thanks,

Suzanne
Tim
Benno


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

[DNSOP] IETF 110 Internet Draft submission cut-off in 4 weeks (22 Feb 2021)

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi,

For those who want to publish a new Internet Draft (version) for IETF 
110, the cut-off is Monday, February 22, 2021 (UTC 23:59).


Four weeks gives the opportunity to consult the WG or contact the WG 
chairs well before the cut-off date.


Best,

-- Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

[DNSOP] IETF 111 Call for Agenda Items DNSOP WG

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

This is a Call for Agenda Items for the IETF 111 in the week of 26-30 
July 2021.


DNSOP has two sessions requested for the IETF 111:

dnsop Session 1 (2:00 requested)

dnsop Session 2 (1:00 requested)

(The preliminary IETF 111 agenda will be published on 25 June 2021.)

Please email the chairs  with your requests. 
*Or* drop us a pull request 
https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/wg-materials/tree/main/dnsop-ietf111 
look for dnsop-ietf111-agenda-requests.md.


Please Note: Draft Submission Deadline is Monday 12 July 2021.

See https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/important-dates/:
* 2021-07-12 (Monday): Internet Draft submission cut-off (for all 
drafts, including -00) by UTC 23:59.  Upload using the ID Submission 
Tool https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/.



Thanks,

Suzanne
Tim
Benno

___
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

Re: [DNSOP] Mapping IANA deprecated to YANG status deprecated [was RE: Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang-03: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)]

[Benno Overeinder]

Thank you Rob.

I am the document shepherd, but reply with no hats.

I understand the concern, and I am fine with the proposed change.

Best,

-- Benno


On 10/06/2021 18:05, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote:

Hi DNS Ops,
  
Warren, Lada and I discussed this further today.  Warren and I think that mapping IANA deprecated to YANG deprecated is the right behaviour here, and Lada is fine with either outcome.
  
The main concern of mapping from IANA 'deprecated' to YANG 'status obsolete' is that it would force a hard transition if any DNS classes or RR's ever needed to be deprecated.  I.e., when a server picks up a new version of the generated YANG types file it would be obliged to immediately remove support for the 'status obsolete' definition with no grace period and no option to continue using it (RFC 7950 describes this is a SHOULD NOT, but this constraint is effectively stronger in the versioning related drafts currently progressing in the NETMOD WG).
  
So, the following change is proposed:
  
OLD:

"status":  Include only if a class or type registration has been
deprecated or obsoleted.  In both cases, use the value "obsolete"
as the argument of the "status" statement.
  
NEW:

   "status":  Include only if a class or type registration has been
deprecated or obsoleted.   IANA "deprecated" maps to YANG
status "deprecated", and IANA "obsolete" maps to YANG status
"obsolete".
  
Does anyone in the WG strongly object to this change?  If so, please let us know by Wed's 16th.
  
Regards,

Rob



-Original Message-
From: Ladislav Lhotka 
Sent: 10 June 2021 12:37
To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) ; The IESG ;
Warren Kumari ; michelle.cot...@iana.org
Cc: draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-y...@ietf.org; dnsop-cha...@ietf.org;
dnsop@ietf.org; be...@nlnetlabs.nl
Subject: RE: Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang-
03: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

"Rob Wilton (rwilton)"  writes:


Hi Lada,

I've also copied Michelle on - since I think that it would be helpful for IANA

to at least be aware of this discussion.


Sorry for being slow to get back to you.  I've expanded on my discuss

comment below, but it may be helpful for you, Warren, I, possibly Michelle,
to have a quick chat to see if we can resolve it.





-Original Message-
From: Ladislav Lhotka 
Sent: 03 June 2021 14:17
To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) ; The IESG 
Cc: draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-y...@ietf.org; dnsop-cha...@ietf.org;
dnsop@ietf.org; be...@nlnetlabs.nl
Subject: Re: Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-

yang-

03: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hi Rob,

On 03. 06. 21 13:16, Robert Wilton via Datatracker wrote:

...


--
DISCUSS:
--

Hi,

One issue that I think we should should discuss and resolve (sorry for

the

late

discuss ballot):

In section 4, it states:

"status":  Include only if a class or type registration has been
   deprecated or obsoleted.  In both cases, use the value "obsolete"
   as the argument of the "status" statement.

I know that we have had some previous discussion on this on Netmod,

but,

if

draft-ietf-netmod-yang-module-versioning-02 gets standardized then it

will

effectively evolve YANG's "status deprecated" into "must implement or
explicitly deviate" and YANG's "status obsolete" into "must not

implement".

It

wasn't clear to me that marking one of these fields as being deprecated

in

an

IANA registry would mean that existing implementations must stop

using it

if

they migrate to a new version of the generated YANG module.  Hence, I

think

that at this stage, it may be safer to map IANA "deprecated" into YANG's
"status deprecated"?



Yes, this was discussed repeatedly in NETMOD and DNSOP WGs. I think

we

currently have to use RFC 7950 for the status definitions, and so in YANG

o  "deprecated" indicates an obsolete definition, but it permits
   new/continued implementation in order to foster interoperability
   with older/existing implementations.

This is incompatible with the meaning of "deprecated" in IANA
registries, which is per RFC 8126: "use is not recommended".


I don't think that there is a perfect answer here, and I think that for the
moment we are looking for the least bad option.

The YANG and IANA definitions of deprecated are obviously different,
but it isn't clear to me how different they actual are from those definitions.

E.g., in neither case do they indicate why they are going away (e.g.,
because they are no longer used, or there is a better way, or there is a
security issue).

I would also argue that "use is not recommended" applies to the YANG
"deprecated" as well, and generally matches what I understand what

deprecated means.

One strong case that was mentioned in DNSOP discussions was a
compromised crypto algorithm. It will 

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-salgado-dnsop-rrserial

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi Davey, all,

On 03/06/2021 15:56, Davey Song wrote:


nothing prevents the use of RRSERIAL and NSID in the
resolvers. Last paragraph of RFC5001 section 2.2 says so, 


Yes. Thanks for pointing it out.


RFC5001 is already implemented by a number of resolvers.

https://www.powerdns.com/compliance.html
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/projects/unbound/rfc-compliance/
https://knot-resolver.readthedocs.io/en/stable/modules-nsid.html
https://www.isc.org/bind9rfc/

-- Benno

--
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

[DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-hardaker-dnsop-nsec3-guidance

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

As a follow-up to the presentation by Wes Hardaker at the IETF 110 DNSOP 
meeting, we want to start a call for adoption of 
draft-hardaker-dnsop-nsec3-guidance on the mailing list.


With the presentation at the DNSOP meeting on IETF 110, there was a 
sufficient general support in the (virtual) room to adopt the draft as a 
working group document.


Now we will start a period of two weeks for the call for adoption of 
draft-hardaker-dnsop-nsec3-guidance on the mailing list.


The draft is available here: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hardaker-dnsop-nsec3-guidance/.


Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption 
by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.


Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.

This call for adoption ends: 24 May 2021


Thanks,

-- Benno

DNSOP co-chair

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

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-hardaker-dnsop-nsec3-guidance

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear DNSOP WG,

Thank you for your feedback and willingness to contribute text or review 
the document in the working group.


The two weeks for the call for adoption has ended and with good support 
from the WG, the document is adopted as a WG Internet-Draft.


The chairs will ask the authors to resubmit the document with the name 
draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec3-guidance.



Thanks,

-- Benno

DNSOP co-chair


On 23/05/2021 09:54, Loganaden Velvindron wrote:

I also support adoption of this document.

On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 3:06 AM Puneet Sood
 wrote:


I support adoption of this document to provide guidance for operators to pick 
sensible NSEC3 parameters and for expected resolver behavior.

-Puneet


On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 4:56 AM Benno Overeinder  wrote:


Hi all,

As a follow-up to the presentation by Wes Hardaker at the IETF 110 DNSOP
meeting, we want to start a call for adoption of
draft-hardaker-dnsop-nsec3-guidance on the mailing list.

With the presentation at the DNSOP meeting on IETF 110, there was a
sufficient general support in the (virtual) room to adopt the draft as a
working group document.

Now we will start a period of two weeks for the call for adoption of
draft-hardaker-dnsop-nsec3-guidance on the mailing list.

The draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hardaker-dnsop-nsec3-guidance/.

Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption
by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.

Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.

This call for adoption ends: 24 May 2021


Thanks,

-- Benno

DNSOP co-chair

___
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



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

Re: [DNSOP] IETF 111 Call for Agenda Items DNSOP WG

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear WG,

This is a gentle reminder.

Draft submission cut-off is Monday 12 July, by 23:59 UTC.

The DNSOP sessions are scheduled for:

- Monday 26 July Session III, 16:00-18:00
- Thursday 29 July Session IV, 16:30-17:30

Please email the chairs  for presentation requests, or 
use our GitHub repo 
https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/wg-materials/tree/main/dnsop-ietf111 and look 
for dnsop-ietf111-agenda-requests.md.

Best regards,

Suzanne
Tim
Benno


> On 16 Jun 2021, at 10:08, Benno Overeinder  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> This is a Call for Agenda Items for the IETF 111 in the week of 26-30 July 
> 2021.
> 
> DNSOP has two sessions requested for the IETF 111:
> 
>dnsop Session 1 (2:00 requested)
> 
>dnsop Session 2 (1:00 requested)
> 
> (The preliminary IETF 111 agenda will be published on 25 June 2021.)
> 
> Please email the chairs  with your requests. *Or* drop 
> us a pull request 
> https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/wg-materials/tree/main/dnsop-ietf111 look 
> for dnsop-ietf111-agenda-requests.md.
> 
> Please Note: Draft Submission Deadline is Monday 12 July 2021.
> 
> See https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/important-dates/:
> * 2021-07-12 (Monday): Internet Draft submission cut-off (for all drafts, 
> including -00) by UTC 23:59.  Upload using the ID Submission Tool 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Suzanne
> Tim
> Benno
> 
> ___
> 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

Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Call for Adoption: draft-arends-dns-error-reporting

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

Considering the support for adoption at the IETF 110 DNSOP meeting and 
support on the mailing list (one email, but no objections), 
draft-arends-dns-error-reporting is being adopted as a DNSOP WG document.


This email closes the call for adoption.

Thanks,

-- Benno


On 07/04/2021 03:59, Paul Hoffman wrote:

On Apr 6, 2021, at 2:07 PM, Benno Overeinder  wrote:


With the IETF 110 DNSOP meeting, the draft DNS Error Reporting 
(draft-arends-dns-error-reporting) is presented by Roy Arends.

In the session, the (virtual) room was asked for adoption of the document or 
raise objections.  On the mic there was general support for adoption.

Now we will start a period of two weeks for the call for adoption of 
draft-arends-dns-error-reporting on the mailing list.

The draft is available here: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-arends-dns-error-reporting/

Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by 
DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.

Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.

This call for adoption ends: 20 April 2021


I support the adoption of this document. Beyond the main use cases in the 
document (reporting DNSSEC problems), it is very likely we can use it in 
current DPRIVE work to report encrypted DNS problems.

--Paul Hoffman


___
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] Call for Adoption: draft-arends-dns-error-reporting

[Benno Overeinder]

With the IETF 110 DNSOP meeting, the draft DNS Error Reporting 
(draft-arends-dns-error-reporting) is presented by Roy Arends.


In the session, the (virtual) room was asked for adoption of the 
document or raise objections.  On the mic there was general support for 
adoption.


Now we will start a period of two weeks for the call for adoption of 
draft-arends-dns-error-reporting on the mailing list.


The draft is available here: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-arends-dns-error-reporting/


Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption 
by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.


Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.

This call for adoption ends: 20 April 2021


Thanks,

-- Benno

DNSOP co-chair

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

[DNSOP] Minutes of IETF 110 DNSOP WG published, please review

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear DNSOP WG,

The minutes of our DNSOP WG meeting at the IETF 110 have been published. 
Many thanks to our note-taker Paul Hoffman.


Read and review it, and if there are any omissions, send feedback to the 
DNSOP chairs.


You can find the published minutes here: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/110/materials/minutes-110-dnsop-00


Thanks,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

[DNSOP] IETF 110 Internet Draft submission cut-off next Monday, 22 February

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi WG,

This is a gentle reminder of the cut-off date for Internet Draft 
submission on Monday, February 22.


Please submit your new or revised version of your Internet Draft by the 
cut-off date on Monday, February 22, 2021 (UTC 23:59).



Best,

-- Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

[DNSOP] IETF 110 Agenda and Call for Agenda Items DNSOP WG

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

The IETF 110 Agenda is out https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/110/agenda.

DNSOP has two sessions scheduled:

dnsop Session 1 (1:00 requested)
Thursday, 11 March 2021, Session II 1530-1630
Room Name: Room 4 size: 504
-
dnsop Session 2 (2:00 requested)
Thursday, 11 March 2021, Session III 1700-1900
Room Name: Room 6 size: 506
-

iCalendar: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/110/sessions/dnsop.ics


This is also a Call for Agenda Items.  Please email the chairs 
 with your requests.  *Or* drop us a pull request 
https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/wg-materials/tree/main/dnsop-ietf110 
look for dnsop-ietf110-agenda-requests.md.


Please Note: Draft Submission Deadline is Monday 22 February 2021.

See https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/important-dates/:
* 2021-02-22 (Monday): Internet Draft submission cut-off (for all 
drafts, including -00) by UTC 23:59.  Upload using the ID Submission 
Tool https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/.



Thanks,

Suzanne
Tim
Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] Doodle poll for DNSOP WG interim week 13-17 September 2021

[Benno Overeinder]

Thank you for filling in the doodle.

There were several options with a similar number of votes, but the 
US/Pacific time zone/participation was the tie breaker.


The DNSOP interim meeting will be scheduled on Wed 15 September, 
1:00-2:00 AM UTC.


Best,

-- Benno


On 29/08/2021 15:39, Benno Overeinder wrote:
Gentle reminder to the WG to fill in the doodle before the end of Monday 
(30 August).


Thanks,

-- Benno


On 25/08/2021 13:53, Benno Overeinder wrote:

Dear DNSOP WG,

We are scheduling a DNSOP WG interim meeting in the week of 13-17 
September.


The following drafts are on the agenda:
* dnsop-avoid-fragmentation
* dnsop-glue-is-not-optional

To select a date and time slot, we created a doodle poll.  The authors 
of the drafts are in the US and Japan time zone, so the time slots 
available take this into account.


https://doodle.com/poll/4gfit23w3ixrmgh8?utm_source=poll_medium=link

Please fill in the doodle before the end of Monday (30 August).

Thank you,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno


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

[DNSOP] Fwd: IAB Seeks Feedback on Candidate for ICANN NomCom; Nominations remain open

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi,

This is also relevant to our WG, so forwarding the call for nominations 
for the ICANN NomCom to the WG mailing list.


As you can read below, one candidate has accepted a nomination, but the 
IAB extended the call for nomination during the feedback period.


Please consider nominating yourself as a candidate for the ICANN NomCom. 
 For more information, read the emails on ietf-announce referenced 
below ([1] and [2]).



Best,

-- Benno


 Forwarded Message 
Subject: IAB Seeks Feedback on Candidate for ICANN NomCom; Nominations 
remain open

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 12:06:22 -0700
From: IAB Executive Administrative Manager 
Reply-To: ex...@iab.org, iab-ch...@iab.org
To: IETF Announcement List 

As previously announced [1], the IAB (on behalf of the IETF) has been 
asked to supply a member to the 2022 ICANN Nominating Committee (NomCom) 
by mid-September 2021. After extending the call for nominations [2], one 
candidate has accepted a nomination:


- Vittorio Bertola

The IAB solicits feedback on this candidate by 23:59 UTC on Thursday, 
2021-09-09. Please send  your responses to iab-ch...@iab.org and 
ex...@iab.org. If you would like your feedback to be anonymized, please 
indicate such in your response.
The IAB desires to have a diverse pool of candidates for the 
appointments it makes. Since there is currently only a single candidate 
for this appointment, the IAB will continue to accept nominations during 
the feedback period. The names of any additional candidates that are put 
forward will also be sent to the community for feedback.


On behalf of the IAB,
Cindy Morgan
IAB Executive Administrative Manager

[1] 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/o-q6AfhJmXAqulmuR-As4alE_wM/


[2] 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/6Snsx5OqRUqYTxhxTI0KvZqglpo/


___
IETF-Announce mailing list
ietf-annou...@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce

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

[DNSOP] Doodle poll for DNSOP WG interim week 13-17 September 2021

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear DNSOP WG,

We are scheduling a DNSOP WG interim meeting in the week of 13-17 
September.


The following drafts are on the agenda:
* dnsop-avoid-fragmentation
* dnsop-glue-is-not-optional

To select a date and time slot, we created a doodle poll.  The authors 
of the drafts are in the US and Japan time zone, so the time slots 
available take this into account.


https://doodle.com/poll/4gfit23w3ixrmgh8?utm_source=poll_medium=link

Please fill in the doodle before the end of Monday (30 August).

Thank you,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] Doodle poll for DNSOP WG interim week 13-17 September 2021

[Benno Overeinder]

Gentle reminder to the WG to fill in the doodle before the end of Monday 
(30 August).


Thanks,

-- Benno


On 25/08/2021 13:53, Benno Overeinder wrote:

Dear DNSOP WG,

We are scheduling a DNSOP WG interim meeting in the week of 13-17 
September.


The following drafts are on the agenda:
* dnsop-avoid-fragmentation
* dnsop-glue-is-not-optional

To select a date and time slot, we created a doodle poll.  The authors 
of the drafts are in the US and Japan time zone, so the time slots 
available take this into account.


https://doodle.com/poll/4gfit23w3ixrmgh8?utm_source=poll_medium=link

Please fill in the doodle before the end of Monday (30 August).

Thank you,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno


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

Re: [DNSOP] REMINDER: DNSOP Interim 2021-09-15 01:00 - 02:00 UTC

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

The Meetecho URL for the interim meeting is:
https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/interim/?short=a910f22a-d46b-401f-be04-97c290437214

All material (agenda, slides, etc.) for the interim meeting can be found 
here:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2021-dnsop-01/session/dnsop

Best,

-- Benno

On 14/09/2021 02:31, Tim Wicinski wrote:

All

A Reminder that there is an upcoming DNSOP Interim meeting.
This will be happening at 2021-09-15 01:00 - 02:00 UTC.
Please adjust for your local time zone.

The Meetecho URL is:
https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/interim/?short=a910f22a-d46b-401f-be04-97c290437 
214


Two items for discussion:

* dnsop-avoid-fragmentation
* dnsop-glue-is-not-optional

Thanks, and hopefully folks can make it.

tim



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

Re: [DNSOP] IETF 111 DNSOP WG session II agenda updated

[Benno Overeinder]

As a follow up to Shumon's email, the order is indeed different than 
usual.  Normally we schedule current business first, but for 
agenda-technical reasons (allowing discussion) we have changed the order.


Hope you understand the exception to the rule.

Best,

-- Benno


On 29/07/2021 21:04, Shumon Huque wrote:
On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 2:49 PM Shumon Huque > wrote:


On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 2:41 PM Peter van Dijk
mailto:peter.van.d...@powerdns.com>>
wrote:


This is not a comment on the specific draft at all. This is a
comment
on WG process. It seems weird to me to discuss prioritisation
-after-
we spend time talking about current and, especially, new business.


I'm sure the chairs will answer you on process, but I wanted to
state that I
had actually posted -00 before the draft cutoff (-01 posted later
was a minor
tweak) and asked for agenda time then. The chairs apologized to me
later
that they hadn't responded earlier and said they could fit me on
Thursday.


Quick followup - I'm happy to go at the end. I'm not even sure I was 
going to

ask for adoption - this was more information sharing, and asking the WG what
I should do with this draft. So it need not impact the current work 
prioritization
discussion. (I am assuming the WG will not bless the BL method, so it is 
unlikely

to adopt it or a derivative, but I may be surprised).

Shumon.


___
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

Re: [DNSOP] Moving forward on draft-ietf-dnsop-private-tld

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi Paul, Working Group,

On 30/07/2021 20:43, Paul Wouters wrote:


So was draft-ietf-dnsop-delegation-only until it was killed yesterday due to 
lack of time because we had to spend it on political discussions with ISO 
liaisons.


To be clear, the discussion of the poll and priorities was informative 
and no decisions have been made about dropping WG documents yet.  Your 
argument that the document got delayed due to other more pressing drafts 
is acknowledged.


We also hold off the suggestion to raise hands for alt-tld draft in a 
similar way.  The poll helped the discussion, but is only part of the 
discussion.  For the individual drafts, the DNSOP chairs will contact 
the authors and discuss the way forward with the WG.



Best regards,

-- Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] Moving WG documents forward

[Benno Overeinder]

On 31/07/2021 18:38, Paul Hoffman wrote:

On Jul 31, 2021, at 4:45 AM, Benno Overeinder  wrote:

For the individual drafts, the DNSOP chairs will contact the authors and 
discuss the way forward with the WG.


During the meeting, there was a call for more transparency, and co-chair Tim 
strongly agreed with it.

Please strongly consider reversing those two steps: discuss the way forward 
with the WG, *then* contact the authors (who should be following the WG 
anyway...). In the unlikely-but-possible case where the WG wants to move 
forward on a draft and none of the current authors want to do so, the chairs 
can ask the list for new volunteer editors.



Agree that the WG determines what happens to a document and that is 
discussed by the WG, that is clear. It was merely a sign of courtesy to 
contact the authors of the document first to let them know that it will 
be discussed.



-- Benno

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

[DNSOP] Doodle poll for DNSOP WG interim week 25-29 October 2021

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear DNSOP WG,

We are planning our second DNSOP WG interim meeting in the week of 25-29 
October.


The draft dns-error-reporting is on the agenda for the interim meeting:
- https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-error-reporting/

Please fill in the Doodle poll to settle on a day and time:

- https://doodle.com/poll/nandts5k295y6i6q?utm_source=poll_medium=link

We will close the Doodle poll at the end of Thursday 14 October.


Best regards,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] Question on interpretation of DO and CD

[Benno Overeinder]

On 07/10/2021 08:52, Mark Andrews wrote:

DNSSEC will work reasonably well if the upstream are just DNSSEC aware (keep the
RRSIGs with the data they cover, pass through negative proofs required for
the answers) if there is not spoofed traffic, a mix of DNSSEC aware and DNSSEC
oblivious server for the zone, etc.  A validating upstream will block this
badness and only pass through good responses. A non-validating upstream will
cache this garbage.

It will fail abysmally if the upstreams are not DNSSEC aware.  Don’t even
attempt it.


With the getdns API library and stub resolver design, quite a bit of 
effort has gone into "road block avoidance" i.e. checking if the 
upstream resolver is DNSSEC aware and falling back to full recursion if 
it isn't (to obtain the DNSSEC data for end-point validation).


For pictures, see the slide desk 
https://getdnsapi.net/slides/an-earnest-stub.pdf, slide 17 and onwards.



-- Benno

--
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

[DNSOP] IETF 112 Call for Agenda Items DNSOP WG

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear WG,

This is a Call for Agenda Items for the IETF 112, from 6-12 November 2021.

The DNSOP WG sessions at IETF 112 are scheduled at (times are CET/UTC+1):

dnsop Session 1
Thursday, 11 November 2021, Session III 1600-1800
Room Name: Room 3 size: 503
-
dnsop Session 2
Friday, 12 November 2021, Session II 1430-1530
Room Name: Room 4 size: 504
-

iCalendar: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/112/sessions/dnsop.ics


Please email the chairs  with your requests. 
*Or* drop us a pull request 
https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/wg-materials/tree/main/dnsop-ietf112 
look for dnsop-ietf112-agenda-requests.md.


Please Note: Draft Submission Deadline is Monday 25 October 2021.

See https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/important-dates/:
* 2021-10-25 (Monday): Internet Draft submission cut-off (for all 
drafts, including -00) by UTC 23:59.  Upload using the ID Submission 
Tool https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/.


Best,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] Doodle poll for DNSOP WG interim week 25-29 October 2021

[Benno Overeinder]

All,

We closed the Doodle poll and selected the time slot Tuesday, October 
26, 14:00-15:00 UTC.  Not in absolute numbers the winner, but all 
implementers can only participate in that time slot.


The next step is to share the agenda and schedule the DNSOP interim in 
datatracker.


Best,

-- Benno


On 11/10/2021 17:45, Benno Overeinder wrote:

Dear DNSOP WG,

We are planning our second DNSOP WG interim meeting in the week of 25-29 
October.


The draft dns-error-reporting is on the agenda for the interim meeting:
- https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-error-reporting/

Please fill in the Doodle poll to settle on a day and time:

- https://doodle.com/poll/nandts5k295y6i6q?utm_source=poll_medium=link

We will close the Doodle poll at the end of Thursday 14 October.


Best regards,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

___
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] planning and call for presentations DNSOP interim in October (in 3rd or 4th week)

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

The interim in September was very helpful in making progress on the 
drafts avoid-fragmentation and glue-is-not-optional.


The DNSOP chairs are planning another interim in October, preferably the 
3rd week of October (18-22 October).  We will send a Doodle for 
selecting day & time later.


We would like to ask authors of drafts to contact us 
 to indicate that they would like to present and 
discuss their draft.  Otherwise, the chairs have suggestions and will 
contact authors.


Thanks!

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

[DNSOP] Fwd: Adaptive DNS Discovery (add) WG Virtual Meeting: 2022-01-26

[Benno Overeinder]

The ADD, DNSOP and DPRIVE working groups are planning a joint interim 
meeting.


Details will follow, but you can already mark the date in your agenda.


Best regards,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno


 Forwarded Message 
Subject: Adaptive DNS Discovery (add) WG Virtual Meeting: 2022-01-26
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 13:28:12 -0800
From: IESG Secretary 
To: IETF-Announce 
CC: a...@ietf.org

The Adaptive DNS Discovery (add) WG will hold
a virtual interim meeting on 2022-01-26 from 09:00 to 10:30 
America/Los_Angeles (17:00 to 18:30 UTC).


Agenda:
To follow

Information about remote participation:
https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/interim/?short=e5378ab2-8290-469a-801f-bf71d754ac20

___
IETF-Announce mailing list
ietf-annou...@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce

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

[DNSOP] Doodle poll for DNSOP WG interim in December 2021

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear DNSOP WG,

We are planning our third DNSOP WG interim meeting in December, in week 
49 or week 50.


The draft DNS Terminology is the main topic on the agenda for the 
interim meeting:

- https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8499bis/

Please fill in the Doodle poll to settle on a day and time:
- https://doodle.com/poll/wt45258fyhw7ppst?utm_source=poll_medium=link

The options for the time slots are PST friendly.

We will close the Doodle poll at the end of Wednesday, 1 December.


Best regards,


Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] IETF 112 DNSOP WG agenda

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear WG,

We updated the agenda for Session II today.

After the presentation of nsec3 iterations guidance, there was quite a 
bit of relevant discussion in the jabber room.  It seemed like a good 
idea to set aside 15 minutes for today's session to continue the 
discussion, and luckily Wes agreed.


https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/112/materials/agenda-112-dnsop-03

Best regards,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno


On 09/11/2021 17:37, Benno Overeinder wrote:
An updated agenda for DNSOP has been published.  We had to swap some 
presentations due to the availability of presenters.


https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/112/materials/agenda-112-dnsop-01


Best regards

Suzanne, Tim and Benno


On 03/11/2021 22:37, Benno Overeinder wrote:

All,

The DNSOP WG agenda for IETF 112 has been published, see 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/112/materials/agenda-112-dnsop-00.


Best regards,

Suzanne
Tim
Benno

___
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

Re: [DNSOP] Doodle poll for DNSOP WG interim in December 2021

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

Don't forget to fill in the Doodle before the end of Wednesday, 1 December.

Thanks!


On 23/11/2021 23:03, Benno Overeinder wrote:

Dear DNSOP WG,

We are planning our third DNSOP WG interim meeting in December, in week 
49 or week 50.


The draft DNS Terminology is the main topic on the agenda for the 
interim meeting:

- https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8499bis/

Please fill in the Doodle poll to settle on a day and time:
- https://doodle.com/poll/wt45258fyhw7ppst?utm_source=poll_medium=link

The options for the time slots are PST friendly.

We will close the Doodle poll at the end of Wednesday, 1 December.


Best regards,


Suzanne, Tim and Benno

___
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] Fwd: Domain Name System Operations (dnsop) WG Virtual Meeting: 2021-10-26

[Benno Overeinder]

Late reminder for the DNSOP interim meeting this afternoon (in 2 minutes).

-- Benno


 Forwarded Message 
Subject: [DNSOP] Domain Name System Operations (dnsop) WG Virtual 
Meeting: 2021-10-26

Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2021 15:39:40 -0700
From: IESG Secretary 
To: IETF-Announce 
CC: dnsop@ietf.org

The Domain Name System Operations (dnsop) WG will hold
a virtual interim meeting on 2021-10-26 from 14:00 to 15:00 UTC.

Agenda:
# DNS Operations (DNSOP) Working Group
## interim-2021-dnsop-02


### Chairs
* Benno Overeinder [be...@nlnetlabs.nl](be...@nlnetlabs.nl)
* Suzanne Woolf [suzworldw...@gmail.com](suzworldw...@gmail.com)
* Tim Wicinski [tjw.i...@gmail.com](tjw.i...@gmail.com)

### IESG Overlord
* Warren Kumari [war...@kumari.net](war...@kumari.net)

### Document Status
* 
[Github](https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/wg-materials/blob/main/dnsop-document-status.md)

* [Datatracker](https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/dnsop/documents/)

* [Propose 
Slides](https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2021-dnsop-02/session/dnsop)


## Session interim-2021-dnsop-02

* Date: 26 October 2021
* Time: 14:00-15:00 UTC
* MeetEcho: 
[https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/interim/?short=87d21aa3-6ff9-401f-b176-c3d3bde92ec4](https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/interim/?short=87d21aa3-6ff9-401f-b176-c3d3bde92ec4)


* Jabber:  [dn...@jabber.ietf.org](dn...@jabber.ietf.org)
* Minutes: 
[https://codimd.ietf.org/notes-ietf-interim-2021-dnsop-02-dnsop](https://codimd.ietf.org/notes-ietf-interim-2021-dnsop-02-dnsop)



## Agenda

### Administrivia

* Agenda Bashing, Blue Sheets, etc,  5 min

### Current Working Group Business

*   DNS Error Reporting
- 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-error-reporting/

- Roy Arends , 50 min
- Chairs Action:

Topics
1. Introduction: state of the I-D
2. Dependency on RFC8914 (Extended DNS Errors): State of 
implementation of EDE in various implementation

3. Issues and potential solutions
- encapsulation of the erroneous domain
- signalling EDE support


Information about remote participation:
https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/interim/?short=87d21aa3-6ff9-401f-b176-c3d3bde92ec4

___
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

Re: [DNSOP] IETF 112 DNSOP WG agenda

[Benno Overeinder]

An updated agenda for DNSOP has been published.  We had to swap some 
presentations due to the availability of presenters.


https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/112/materials/agenda-112-dnsop-01


Best regards

Suzanne, Tim and Benno


On 03/11/2021 22:37, Benno Overeinder wrote:

All,

The DNSOP WG agenda for IETF 112 has been published, see 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/112/materials/agenda-112-dnsop-00.


Best regards,

Suzanne
Tim
Benno

___
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

Re: [DNSOP] nsec3-parameters opinions gathered

[Benno Overeinder]

Wes,

On 05/11/2021 09:40, Vladimír Čunát wrote:

On 04/11/2021 23.44, Wes Hardaker wrote:

The most important sticking point is there are 4 implementations (thank
you for the links Matthijs) that have implemented 150.  Since DNSOP
strives for implementations of specs, I think this is the number we
should publish*unless the vendors speak up and say they'll drive lower*.


I'm convinced that 150 was just a quick stop-gap compromise and that 
from the start vendors expected that dnsop might set it lower later. 
Therefore I don't think this *argument* for keeping 150 is really valid.


As for Knot Resolver, I see no problem in setting the hard limit lower, 
especially if that gets published in this RFC.  From Viktor I gather 
that 100 shouldn't cause issues even at this moment, especially if it's 
only a limit for downgrading to insecure (which won't be even noticed by 
most DNS consumers).  So personally I expected the draft to lower the 
bound to <=100, though as I said... for us the *overall* performance 
ratio from e.g. 150 -> 50 isn't that large.


For Unbound, we have no problem setting the iteration cap to a value 
lower than the current 150.  If Viktor's analysis shows a limit of 100 
is feasible without (m)any problems for operators, and this value will 
be adopted in the soon-to-be-released RFC, we will use the new limit value.



Cheers,

-- Benno


--
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

[DNSOP] IETF 112 DNSOP WG agenda

[Benno Overeinder]

All,

The DNSOP WG agenda for IETF 112 has been published, see 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/112/materials/agenda-112-dnsop-00.


Best regards,

Suzanne
Tim
Benno

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

[DNSOP] DNSOP WG interim-2021-dnsop-03 meeting agenda (December 15, 2021)

[Benno Overeinder]

As previously announced, the DNSOP WG will hold a virtual interim 
meeting on Wednesday, December 15 from 17:00 to 18:00 UTC.


We have an updated agenda:

* DNS Terminology, 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8499bis/ (30 mins)


* Delegation Revalidation by DNS Resolvers, 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-ns-revalidation/ (25 mins)


Information about agenda, remote participation and more:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/agenda-interim-2021-dnsop-03-dnsop-01/


Best regards,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] Doodle poll for DNSOP WG interim in December 2021

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi,

The selection has been made.  Virtually all participants can attend the 
DNSOP interim meeting on December 15, 17:00-18:00 UTC.


I will make the reservations in datatracker and Meetecho, and forward 
the details to the mailing list.



Best regards,

-- Benno


On 29/11/2021 12:35, Benno Overeinder wrote:

Hi all,

Don't forget to fill in the Doodle before the end of Wednesday, 1 December.

Thanks!


On 23/11/2021 23:03, Benno Overeinder wrote:

Dear DNSOP WG,

We are planning our third DNSOP WG interim meeting in December, in 
week 49 or week 50.


The draft DNS Terminology is the main topic on the agenda for the 
interim meeting:

- https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8499bis/

Please fill in the Doodle poll to settle on a day and time:
- 
https://doodle.com/poll/wt45258fyhw7ppst?utm_source=poll_medium=link


The options for the time slots are PST friendly.

We will close the Doodle poll at the end of Wednesday, 1 December.


Best regards,


Suzanne, Tim and Benno

___
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

[DNSOP] IETF 111 DNSOP WG agenda published

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear WG,

The DNSOP WG agenda for IETF 111 has been published, see 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/materials/agenda-111-dnsop-04.


Best regards,

Suzanne
Tim
Benno

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

Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] IETF 111 DNSOP WG agenda published

[Benno Overeinder]

On 21/07/2021 02:11, Paul Hoffman wrote:


On Jul 20, 2021, at 3:57 PM, Benno Overeinder  wrote:


The DNSOP WG agenda for IETF 111 has been published, see 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/materials/agenda-111-dnsop-04.


Earlier on the list, there was a discussion about how long the queue of current 
WG drafts was, and some of us suggested that the WG stop adopting new drafts 
while we pare down the queue. This agenda lists four possible additional new 
drafts for the WG.

Can you tell us ahead of time whether these proposals might become WG documents 
in the near future? I ask because there are many other drafts that might want 
to become part of the WG queue as well.


Thanks for bringing up this topic.  The DNSOP co-chairs plan to discuss 
current active WG drafts and prioritize existing work in the WG.


We will use the chair's slides from Session I to start this discussion. 
 Tim also sent a questionnaire email to the mailing list to get an idea 
of what the WG wants to prioritise.  This discussion is scheduled for 
DNSOP WG Session II on Thursday.



Best regards,

-- Benno

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

[DNSOP] ANRW 2021 DNS Privacy session on Wednesday 28 July

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

As mentioned during the DNSOP WG session yesterday, the Applied 
Networking Research Workshop (ANRW 2021) also takes place this week.


On Wednesday 28 July there will be a session on DNS Privacy, see the 
programme https://irtf.org/anrw/2021/program.html and scroll down to the 
session:


* Encryption without Centralization: Distributing DNS Queries Across 
Recursive Resolvers, by Austin Hounsel, Paul Schmitt, Kevin Borgolte, 
and Nick Feamster
* Institutional Privacy Risks in Sharing DNS Data, by Basileal Imana, 
Aleksandra Korolova, and John Heidemann
* DNS over TCP Considered Vulnerable, by Tianxiang Dai, Haya Shulman, 
and Michael Waidner


Registration is still open, but needs some time to be processed.  So 
don't wait for the last minute to sign up for ANRW to join the DNS 
Privacy session.


-- Benno

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

[DNSOP] IETF 111 DNSOP WG session II agenda updated

[Benno Overeinder]

Dear WG,

We have updated the agenda for DNSOP WG session II on Thursday 29 July. 
 The updated agenda is uploaded to datatracker: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/materials/agenda-111-dnsop-06


See you all on Thursday!

Suzanne
Tim
Benno

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

[DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-thomassen-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping

[Benno Overeinder]

As announced during the DNSOP meeting this week at the IETF 113, we are 
starting a Call for Adoption for the 
draft-thomassen-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping.  With the survey we 
conducted before the last IETF 112, this draft was a clear candidate.


With this email we start a period of two weeks for the call for adoption 
of draft-thomassen-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping on the mailing list.


The draft is available here: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-thomassen-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping/


Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption 
by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.


Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.

This call for adoption ends: 8 April 2022

Thanks,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

[DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-wisser-dnssec-automation

[Benno Overeinder]

As with the previous Call for Adoption today, at this week's DNSOP 
meeting at IETF 113, we announced that we are initiating a Call for 
Adoption for the draft-wisser-dnssec-automation.  With the survey we 
conducted for the last IETF 112, this draft was also a clear candidate.


With this email we start a period of two weeks for the call for adoption 
of draft-wisser-dnssec-automation on the mailing list.


The draft is available here: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wisser-dnssec-automation/.


Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption 
by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.


Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.

This call for adoption ends: 8 April 2022

Thanks,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno

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

[DNSOP] Fwd: [Add] Joint ADD-DPRIVE-DNSOPS January 26, 2022 Interim

[Benno Overeinder]

Hi all,

As previously announced, there will be a joint ADD-DPRIVE-DNSOP interim 
meeting next Wednesday, January 26.  Below is the forwarded email from 
the ADD mailing list.  Note: the date is Wednesday, January 26.


Best regards,

Suzanne, Tim and Benno


 Forwarded Message 
Subject:[Add] Joint ADD-DPRIVE-DNSOPS January 27, 2022 Interim
Date:   Mon, 10 Jan 2022 19:42:04 +
From:   Deen, Glenn 
To: a...@ietf.org 



Hi everyone,

The chairs of ADD, DPRIVE, and DNSOPS have scheduled a joint interim on 
the topic of Split-DNS for January 27, 2022 from 1700-1830 UTC.


This was originally announced on the ADD list back on Dec 20, but didn’t 
get a lot of attention like due to the holidays at the time 
(https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/add/Jd3Tql9dLkYEBWrv5ifsMAU7M9g/ 
)


Background:

---

This is a follow up to the discussion that has taken place in ADD around 
how to support discovery of encrypted DNS resolvers in Split-DNS 
environments.   That extended discussion in ADD current stands at:  (1) 
The ADD group showed that there was consensus that the problem of how to 
do discovery in Split-DNS environments was important for the group to 
work on;  (2) The ADD group currently does not have consensus on how it 
should be done.  (3) A number of discussion issues that are outside of 
the ADD Charter have been raised around requirements that can uniquely 
occur in split-DNS environments.


It is the intent to use this joint session to discuss such issues, and 
others as needed to better understand the requirements that need to be 
satisfied for a ADD discovery mechanism for Split-DNS environments.


Motivation:

--

  * Split-DNS is widely used in Enterprise and Intuitional network
operations and in VPN environments.
  * Without a practical and acceptable standard on how to discover
encrypted DNS resolvers it is likely that operators that make use of
split-DNS will take it upon themselves to invent and deploy a wide
variety of non-standardized discovery methods.   This will hamper
any future standards that may be developed, and will impact users
negatively since they will not have a standard discovery mechanism
to make use of.
  * The hope is that by discussing the security, privacy, and
operational needs of discovery in Split-DNS environments that the
ADD group can make progress toward documenting how to do it in a
standard way

Purpose of the Joint Interim:

--

  * To discuss the issues around discovery of encrypted DNS resolvers in
a  Split-DNS environment.

What this Interim is NOT:

---

  * This is not intended as a referendum on the use of split-DNS.
  * This is not a workshop on how proposals of how to end the practice
of Split-DNS or how to re-engineer networks that have it currently
deployed.

Agenda

---

  * Agenda and any Materials will be posted at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2022-add-01/session/add

  * The chairs of the 3 groups are working on the agenda for the Interim
and plan on making it available well ahead of the 1-27-2022 Interim
Meeting.
Thanks,

Glenn Deen on behalf of the ADD, DPrive, DNSOPS co-chairs
-- 
Add mailing list
a...@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/add

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