On Sep 27, 2018, at 12:55 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> Yup. Sorry about that. I just submitted a new version that I hope
> addresses this request.
There's a mistake in the update—while I was working on the new text, I added a
caveat about implicit sessions, but didn't notice that that had
Mirja, I notice that you are still holding a discuss on this document. I
believe that we addressed the concerns you raised in your discuss. Could you
please let us know if there is still work to do on this, and if not, clear the
discuss?
Thanks!
On Sep 17, 2018, at 6:25 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> However, it seems that my point
> about an "application protocol profile" for TLS 1.3 0-RTT was deferred
> until the resolution of a different thread covering 0-RTT, but that
> we never picked it back up.
Yup. Sorry about that. I just
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 WG of the IETF.
Title : DNS Stateful Operations
Authors : Ray Bellis
Stuart Cheshire
Hi Tommy,
Thanks for your suggestions.
On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 at 23:38, Tommy Pauly wrote:
> +1 to the point that the proposal for NHE is essentially a mechanism for
> the ISP and/or content provider to work around a broken deployment that
> they should be in a position to fix themselves, or
Hi Barbara,
Thanks for your comments and sharing. I need to note that NHE is not
competing with
Client-side HE or competing with deployment of fully functioning IPv6. The
background of
NHE is :
1) the dualstack is real. Client is facing the choice ipv4 or ipv6.
2) the poor or unpredictable IPv6
Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-isp-ip6rdns-07: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel-15: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
Thank you for providing text. I put that in the GitHub version.
W
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:13 PM Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On 26 Sep 2018, at 14:30, Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 12:40 PM Paul Hoffman
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 26 Sep 2018, at 12:07, Warren Kumari wrote:
> >>
>
Jari, thank you for your review. Geoff, thanks for your responses. I have
entered a No Objection ballot.
Alissa
> On Aug 30, 2018, at 10:10 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:
>
> Thanks for the responses, Geoff.
>
> One minor follow-up:
>
>> The final point I am not so convinced about. The reason is
Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel-15: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
On 26 Sep 2018, at 14:30, Warren Kumari wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 12:40 PM Paul Hoffman
wrote:
On 26 Sep 2018, at 12:07, Warren Kumari wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 11:16 AM Benjamin Kaduk
wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 10:12:08AM -0700, Warren Kumari wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26,
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 12:40 PM Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On 26 Sep 2018, at 12:07, Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 11:16 AM Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 10:12:08AM -0700, Warren Kumari wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:16 AM Benjamin Kaduk
> >>>
Hi Dave,
Responding only to the xml2rfc issue, not to the document content:
On 2018-09-26 21:24, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 9/24/2018 6:16 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>>>
>>> + Those registered by IANA in the "Service Name and Transport
>>> Protocol Port Number Registry [RFC6335]"
Reviewer: Erik Kline
Review result: Ready with Nits
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For more
On 26 Sep 2018, at 12:07, Warren Kumari wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 11:16 AM Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 10:12:08AM -0700, Warren Kumari wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:16 AM Benjamin Kaduk
wrote:
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
On 9/24/2018 6:16 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
+ Those registered by IANA in the "Service Name and Transport
Protocol Port Number Registry [RFC6335]"
Move the end quote after Registry.
ok. Good catch.
Interesting. Just discovered that this probably qualifies as a bug in
the
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 11:16 AM Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 10:12:08AM -0700, Warren Kumari wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:16 AM Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> >
> > > Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
> > > draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel-15:
Speaking for myself, I see HE as a mechanism whose usefulness as described
(selecting between IPv4 and IPv6 addresses) will wane, but which applied in a
different way may have value long term. The latter has to do with access from
or to multi-addressed services and selecting the one that seems
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:16 AM Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel-15: Discuss
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-isp-ip6rdns-06: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
...
In my experience, there are two ways IPv6 can be broken:
1) ICMPv6 being filtered, so PMTUD doesn't work.
perhaps we can choose a flag day to turn on a new option in our ipv6
stacks-- add an ipv6 option to all our syn and syn-ack packets, and/or
require
And this is what I tried to say several times:
We need to take advantage of HE and NHE, or other means, to "report" to the
ISPs about brokenness.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-palet-v6ops-he-reporting-00
Regards,
Jordi
-Mensaje original-
De: v6ops en nombre de Tommy Pauly
Hi Barbara,
In my experience, there are two ways IPv6 can be broken:
1) ICMPv6 being filtered, so PMTUD doesn't work.
2) IPv6 deployment issues (including having records with no or bad IPv6
connectivity).
HE only helps for 2).
But 2 can be caused in different points between the source and
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel-15: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer
STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
> Why would an ISP choose to deploy partial or broken IPv6 + NHE, rather
> than properly functioning IPv6?
That was my initial reaction too :-) I think the actual idea is to work
around brokenness on third party networks, e.g. the ISP has working v6,
the web site has
Gert Doering wrote:
>
> I'm not sure how often I've heard the well-meaning suggestion "just do
> not deliver DNS records of type if ".
>
> It was a bad idea at all times, and it is still a bad idea. Never withhold
> legitimate records.
I think it's even worse in this case.
The point of happy
In your letter dated Wed, 26 Sep 2018 12:58:30 +1000 you wrote:
>I have said before, but don't know if I still adhere to it, but
>anyways, here's a question: How *long* do people think a biassing
>mechanism like HE is a good idea?
>
>I used to love HE. I now have a sense, I'm more neutral. Maybe,
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 03:56:15PM +0800, Chongfeng Xie wrote:
> In the early stage of dual-stack deployment, we can not expect the
> IPv6 has matched performance with IPv4.
This is true. But "early stage of dual-stack deployment" was 15 years ago,
so this is not a valid excuse today.
I'm working in China telecom. End users' experience is the uppermost important
for us, either is over IPv4 or IPv6. People have fears on IPv6 transition
because they are not sure of IPv6 performance. Actually we have received user's
complains when IPv6 was deployed. IPv6-only is
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 03:14:42PM +0800, Davey Song wrote:
> NHE can
> help reduce the unnecessary traffic emitted by HE client becuase the
> record
> will be omitted or delayed if IPv6 connectivity is poorer. I don't see any
> interferance now.
I'm not sure how often I've heard the
> If we’re discussing host based versus network based happy eyeballs, would
> it be naive to think that the network based HE would interfere with the
> client’s HE?
>
Currently this draft only considers IPv4/IPv6 racing situation. The general
address
racing is already done for all clients
On Wed., 26 Sep. 2018, 16:10 Ole Troan, wrote:
> Davey,
>
> If we’re discussing host based versus network based happy eyeballs, would
> it be naive to think that the network based HE would interfere with the
> client’s HE?
>
> A router knows very little about end to end properties of a
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 03:28:24PM +1000, George Michaelson wrote:
> run a race, but bias the race towards the one you like? oky.. But
> once we're beyond a world where the V6 needs the bias, for anyone
> stuck on the vestigial 4-is-better space, this means they incurred
> *additional*
Hi George,
Actually the idea of NHE is inspired partially by CDN stuff, which involve
lots of measurments
and route users to visit a best path against network dynamics. It proves
to be a good practice
for morden Internet. No doubt. I'm wondering CDN is also breaking DNSSEC to
stub-resolver,
Davey,
If we’re discussing host based versus network based happy eyeballs, would it be
naive to think that the network based HE would interfere with the client’s HE?
A router knows very little about end to end properties of a connection. It
could of course do those measurements by looking
36 matches
Mail list logo
