[DNSOP] (no subject)

>From not-for-mail Fri Oct 7 22:00:19 2016 To: list-iecc-lists-ietf-dn...@johnlevine.com Path: not-for-mail Subject: Re: [DNSOP] In a vacuum, nobody can hear you scream, was On the call for adoption on Special Use Names Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2016 02:00:18 + (UTC) Organization: Taughannock

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call [draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse]

On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Warren Kumari wrote: > Okey dokey, everyone! > > I will be attempting to re-add, and better explain the "positive" answers bit. > I really appreciate all of the feedback which we have received - I'm > juggling a few plates at the moment, and so

[DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse-04.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations of the IETF. Title : Aggressive use of NSEC/NSEC3 Authors : Kazunori Fujiwara Akira Kato

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call

On 10/7/16 7:07 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: DONE. I now have: "Use of NSEC / NSEC3 resource records without DNSSEC validation may create serious security issues, and so this technique requires DNSSEC validation." I could just drop this sentence, but someone (Stephane?) wanted reinforcement that

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call

On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 2:49 AM, Tim Wicinski wrote: > > > On 10/5/16 2:30 PM, 神明達哉 wrote: >> >> At Tue, 4 Oct 2016 17:39:55 -0400, >> Warren Kumari wrote: >> - Section 3: this section also has an issue of "recursive resolver". Although it may

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call

On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 12:22 PM, 神明達哉 wrote: > At Thu, 6 Oct 2016 02:49:34 -0400, > Tim Wicinski wrote: > >> >> I did some fix up - how do you like: >> >> "If a validating resolver gets a query for cat.example.com, it will >> >> query the example.com

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call

On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:06 AM, Matthijs Mekking wrote: > All, > > I reviewed this draft and while it is shaping up nicely, I don't think it is > quite ready for publication: > > 1. As John pointed out earlier, the document makes an inconsistent use of > RFCC 2119

[DNSOP] Special Use Names Summary

Special Use Names Summary First, thanks to all for a pretty useful discussion. There were a few things uncovered which are not in either draft. It does appear that the draft-tldr-sutld-ps is the very rough consensus choice as a starting point. Both drafts say useful things, and the chairs

Re: [DNSOP] In a vacuum, nobody can hear you scream, was On the call for adoption on Special Use Names

On 10/07/2016 06:36 PM, Alain Durand wrote: > > However, there is something that can be done before: provide a safe place > in the DNS tree where people can exist without colliding with the rest of > the tree. We can't prevent people from ignoring it and keep using whatever > name they want, but

Re: [DNSOP] Reminder: WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse ends Tonight

On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 02:53:38AM -0400, > Tim Wicinski wrote > a message of 17 lines which said: > >> Just a reminder that the WGLC for >> draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse will end later

Re: [DNSOP] Reminder: WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse ends Tonight

On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Tony Finch wrote: > I have read through the draft and sent a pull request with some minor > editorial fixes. Thank you. These have been accepted / incorporated. > > Here are some more substantial suggestions / questions. Sorry for being so > late

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-key-tag

At Thu, 6 Oct 2016 03:00:36 -0400, Tim Wicinski wrote: > The authors for this document have addressed some lingering outstanding > issues, and it appears ready for Working Group Last Call. > > This starts a Working Group Last Call for: > draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-key-tag > >

Re: [DNSOP] In a vacuum, nobody can hear you scream, was On the call for adoption on Special Use Names

> On Oct 7, 2016, at 6:51 AM, John Levine wrote: > > f someone creates popular software leaking requests for > .PICKLE, we can grouse all we want but since we're not the Network > Police, there's not much we can do about it. There is not much that can be done after the fact, I

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call on "Aggressive use of NSEC/NSEC3"

Warren, On 04-10-16 18:56, Warren Kumari wrote: On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 11:04 AM, John Levine wrote: Please review the draft and offer relevant comments. Also, if someone feels the document is *not* ready for publication, please speak out with your reasons. I think it's

Re: [DNSOP] Looking for IANA registry for --xn

Jim Reid wrote: > > On 7 Oct 2016, at 03:33, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > > Protocol matters. And just because IANA does 'assignments' that are not > > 'registrations' doesn't mean that is right or should continue. > > I’m sure the RIRs and the hundreds of millions

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call

At Thu, 6 Oct 2016 02:49:34 -0400, Tim Wicinski wrote: > >> I did some fix up - how do you like: > >> "If a validating resolver gets a query for cat.example.com, it will > >> query the example.com servers and will get back an NSEC (or NSEC3) > >> record starting that there

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call [draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse]

Okey dokey, everyone! I will be attempting to re-add, and better explain the "positive" answers bit. I really appreciate all of the feedback which we have received - I'm juggling a few plates at the moment, and so am somewhat distracted, but I'll try integrate them fully and in order. This will

Re: [DNSOP] Reminder: WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse ends Tonight

On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Warren Kumari wrote: > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 3:38 AM, Matthijs Mekking > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 06-10-16 08:53, Tim Wicinski wrote: >>> >>> Just a reminder that the WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse >>>

Re: [DNSOP] Reminder: WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse ends Tonight

On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 3:38 AM, Matthijs Mekking wrote: > Hi, > > On 06-10-16 08:53, Tim Wicinski wrote: >> >> Just a reminder that the WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse >> will end later today (barring any stuck issues). The authors appear to >> have

Re: [DNSOP] Looking for IANA registry for --xn

> On 7 Oct 2016, at 03:33, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > > Protocol matters. And just because IANA does 'assignments' that are not > 'registrations' doesn't mean that is right or should continue. I’m sure the RIRs and the hundreds of millions of people who are using IP