Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

On 25/06/2014 12:12 am, "Tim Wicinski" wrote: >(I am merging two of Paul Hoffman's messages into one reply. I hope I am >not muddling the message) Doing my own leap frog as well. > > > >Speaking as co-chair, Mr. Hoffman is absolutely correct on this point - >we are more than OK with half-baked

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

Tim Wicinski wrote: > ... > > On 6/24/14 3:57 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > > >> My hope is that DNSOP doesn't become too DNSEXT-like where if the -00 >> for a proposal isn't universally loved, it is destroyed instead of >> worked on. > > We as chairs do not have that mind set. My personal feeling i

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

From: Tim Wicinski Date: 2014-06-24 22:12 To: dnsop Subject: Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00 > >Speaking as co-chair, Mr. Hoffman is absolutely correct on this point - >we are more than OK with half-baked ideas being hand-waved and a solid >discussion

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

(I am merging two of Paul Hoffman's messages into one reply. I hope I am not muddling the message) On 6/24/14 3:57 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: On Jun 24, 2014, at 8:08 AM, Terry Manderson wrote: Yes, I noted the hand waving as well as a few hand-passes of problems to $elsewhere. The latter is

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > On Jun 24, 2014, at 8:08 AM, Terry Manderson > wrote: > >> Yes, I noted the hand waving as well as a few hand-passes of problems to >> $elsewhere. > > The latter is unintentional. That is, the goal is to have a spec that does > everything i

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > Just to be clear: Warren asked for feedback with an open mind. If you read > the draft, you'll see Warren and I explicitly handwave. Also, note that at > the moment, he and I disagree about some of the suggestions, just like it > seems that

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

On Jun 24, 2014, at 8:08 AM, Terry Manderson wrote: > Yes, I noted the hand waving as well as a few hand-passes of problems to > $elsewhere. The latter is unintentional. That is, the goal is to have a spec that does everything it says it will. > I personally think this needs (much) more thinki

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

Hi, Yes, I noted the hand waving as well as a few hand-passes of problems to $elsewhere. I personally think this needs (much) more thinking, before coming to the front of the room in DNSOP - are you considering a bar session somewhere in Toronto to chat through this? Cheers Terry On 24/06/2014

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

Just to be clear: Warren asked for feedback with an open mind. If you read the draft, you'll see Warren and I explicitly handwave. Also, note that at the moment, he and I disagree about some of the suggestions, just like it seems that some people here so far do. FWIW, I currently prefer the resu

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

Paul, On Jun 23, 2014, at 5:02 AM, Paul Vixie wrote: > in this case, warren kumari is usually pretty smart and sane, but this > time he's come up with a really bad idea. Your message seemed to have been oddly truncated such that the "because ..." part of this sentence was lost. > my own relate

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

The draft says " Once the resolver has transferred and validated the zone, it MUST act as though it is a copy of the root zone." If the idea in this document is implemented, does it mean that the "root servers" will be everywhere in the internet? Jiankang Yao _

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

i'm worried that silence will seem like assent. (for example, someone who noted that i hadn't complained out loud about the dns-over-tcp preso at the recent dns-oarc meeting in warsaw to assume that i was in favour of it -- whereas the truth is at

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

On 22 Jun 2014, at 18:41, Joe Abley wrote: > > On 22 Jun 2014, at 11:54, John Levine wrote: > As I understand it, this changes DNS caches so that for the root zone its behavior is somewhere between a cache and a secondary master. >>> >>> The cache remains precisely a cache. >> >

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

In message , "John R Levine" writes: > >> I understand that it's still a cache in the DNS hierarchy, but in > >> operation, it's much more like a secondary master. Like a secondary, > >> it bulk fetches the zone, answers all queries about that zone from its > >> own copy, and uses the SOA times

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

I understand that it's still a cache in the DNS hierarchy, but in operation, it's much more like a secondary master. Like a secondary, it bulk fetches the zone, answers all queries about that zone from its own copy, and uses the SOA times to decide when to fetch again. There are some potentiall

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

On 22 Jun 2014, at 11:54, John Levine wrote: >>> As I understand it, this changes DNS caches so that for the root zone >>> its behavior is somewhere between a cache and a secondary master. >> >> The cache remains precisely a cache. > > I understand that it's still a cache in the DNS hierarch

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

>> As I understand it, this changes DNS caches so that for the root zone >> its behavior is somewhere between a cache and a secondary master. > >The cache remains precisely a cache. I understand that it's still a cache in the DNS hierarchy, but in operation, it's much more like a secondary maste

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

On Jun 22, 2014, at 2:14 AM, John Levine wrote: >> Reactions have been, um, mixed. Some folk say it;s a no-brainer, >> others seriously dislike the idea. > > As I understand it, this changes DNS caches so that for the root zone > its behavior is somewhere between a cache and a secondary master.

Re: [DNSOP] feedback on draft-wkumari-dnsop-dist-root-00

>Reactions have been, um, mixed. Some folk say it;s a no-brainer, >others seriously dislike the idea. As I understand it, this changes DNS caches so that for the root zone its behavior is somewhere between a cache and a secondary master. It slurps up a copy of the root zone by AXFR or rsync or so