Subject: Re: [dns-dir] draft-ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic-13

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:23:56 -0500

Hi,

On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 08:25:22PM +0000, Ralph Droms (rdroms) wrote:
> Andrew - I see that you are listed as having reviewed a previous revision of draft-ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic.  Do you have any thoughts on draft-ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic-13 that should be reflected in my IESG review?
> 

The problem I tripped over last time was the use of NXRRSET, which
isn't what turned out to be wanted.  This was fixed in -12.

I'll be perfectly honest that I think this entire thing is a massive,
unsustainable kludge.  But given that it's all part of the NAT64
craptacular pile, that's not really an objection, and being one of the
offenders who made that pile as high as it is I can hardly object
anyway.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]

---

From: Ralph Droms <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:09:20 -0500

> offenders who made that pile as high as it is I can hardly object

One more question: draft-cheshire-dnsext-special-names-03 is in ready to publish, waiting in cluster C83.  Did you consider section 5, Domain Name Reservation Considerations, of that document; specifically, although draft-cheshire-dnsext-special-names-03 has not yet been published, is it  worth the effort to answer the questions in section 5?

- Ralph

> 
> A
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Sullivan
> [email-masked]
> _______________________________________________
> dns-dir mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-dir

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:47:02 -0500

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 08:09:20AM -0500, Ralph Droms wrote:

> One more question: draft-cheshire-dnsext-special-names-03 is in
> ready to publish, waiting in cluster C83.

Oh, interesting.  I thought maybe that document had submerged because
of how it impinges on the relationship with ICANN.  But if it's going
to get published, then. . . 

>  Did you consider section
> 5, Domain Name Reservation Considerations, of that document;
> specifically, although draft-cheshire-dnsext-special-names-03 has
> not yet been published, is it worth the effort to answer the
> questions in section 5?

. . . yes, it is, and no, I didn't consider them.  Note that this
particular name doesn't have any implications for the root zone,
though it does require IANA action to register the name in .arpa.
Here are the answers, in any case:

1.  No, although this is a name in .arpa and therefore is sort of
already marked as special.

2.  Yes.  Any application attempting to perform NAT64 discovery will
query the name.

3.  Yes, to the extent the API or library is affected by NAT64.

4.  No.

5.  No.

6.  This name has effects for operators of NAT64/DNS64, but otherwise
is just another .arpa name.

7.  The registry for .arpa is held at IANA, and only IANA needs to
take action here.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]

---

From: Ralph Droms <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 11:24:35 -0500

> to get published, then. . . 

Yes, I expect it to be published soon.

> 7.  The registry for .arpa is held at IANA, and only IANA needs to

Thanks a lot for offering that text.

- Ralph