Subject: Re: [dnsext] technical errata filed for RFC 1995 (eid=3196/3197)

From: Alfred Hönes <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 17:12:28 +0200 (MESZ)

Recently, Andreas Gustafsson has supplied a DNSIND mailing list
thread on RFC 1995 from November 1999 that shows that the technical
flaws I had shortly mentioned in the DNSEXT sessions in Maastricht
and Prague as a reason to work on a rfc1995bis document already had
been pointed out by Andreas in 1999 and have been discussed on dnsind.

For the record, I have now filed two corresponding Technical Errata
including a short "Historical Note" for clarification of the
precedence; see
  http://www.RFC-Editor.ORG/errata_search.php?rfc=1995

(In the past, the IESG has asked for Errata as an argument that
a 'bis' document is needed; so I hope this might help with
draft-dnsext-rfc1995bis-ixfr.)

Kind regards,
  Alfred.

---

From: Masataka Ohta <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 19:07:04 +0900

For your first point:

 >   If an IXFR query with the same or newer version number than that of
 >   the server is received, it is replied to with a single SOA record of
 >   the server's current version, just as in AXFR.

the original intention is "just as for preceding SOA query in AXFR 
transaction exchanges".

For your third point, your replacement of "RRs" to "RRsets" only
increases confusion because "RRs" of RFC1995 means, according
to your terminology, "an RRset".

As RFC1035 states "a possibly partial set of RRs", the
original terminology of "RRs" mean "an RR set" should be
preserved.

 > So there never are partial RRs in any IXFR response packets.

With the following example in RFC1995:

       Answer     | JAIN.AD.JP.         IN SOA serial=3               |
                  | JAIN.AD.JP.         IN SOA serial=1               |
                  | NEZU.JAIN.AD.JP.    IN A   133.69.136.5           |
                  | JAIN.AD.JP.         IN SOA serial=2               |
                  | JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A   133.69.136.4           |
                  | JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A   192.41.197.2           |
                  | JAIN.AD.JP.         IN SOA serial=2               |
                  | JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A   133.69.136.4           |
                  | JAIN.AD.JP.         IN SOA serial=3               |
                  | JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A   133.69.136.3           |
                  | JAIN.AD.JP.         IN SOA serial=3               |

a full RR set is:

       JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A   133.69.136.3
                           IN A   192.41.197.2

and

                  | NEZU.JAIN.AD.JP.    IN A   133.69.136.5           |

is a partial RR set in the IXFR response message.

 > draft-dnsext-rfc1995bis-ixfr.)

I still have never seen any real world operational reasoning
for IXFR-only.

						Masataka Ohta