I've commented on the GH issue directly. -Anthony
P.S. To everyone involved, thank you for continuing your hard work on this specification. On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 5:45 AM Matthijs Mekking <matth...@pletterpet.nl> wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to start separate threads on the remaining issues of the > ANAME draft. One issue that remains to be solved is whether having an A > or AAAA record next to the ANAME should take precedence or not. > > Draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-aname/ > Issue: https://github.com/each/draft-aname/issues/58 > > This was discussed face to face during IETF 101 and at that time the > conclusion was that the correct behavior is that ANAME takes precedence: > If you implement ANAME, the target lookup for A and AAAA will always be > made. If the lookup succeeds, the sibling address records are replaced > with the target address records. If the lookup fails, the sibling > address records remain in the zone. > > Jan Včelák mentioned that at least NS1 uses a different order of > priority: If an sibling address record exists next to the ANAME it takes > precedence and no target lookup is done for that address record type. > > In order to provide identical behavior between providers (make ANAME > work in the multi-provider model) we should agree on the priority order. > > To me, it makes much more sense to use the sibling address record as a > default, and the ANAME target lookup can replace the sibling address > records. The target address records will improve the answer. > > If you place an override, adding an address record next to ANAME, you > can achieve the same thing by not placing the ANAME record in your zone > at all. > > But when the sibling address records take precedence, it has the > property that you can set up ANAME for only one address type, for > example ANAME for A but not for AAAA. I would like to know if there is a > good use case for having this property. > > I would like to hear an opinion from the working group (preferably from > ANAME providers). Specifically do you have a preference of priority > order? Do you think having the "set up ANAME for one address type" > property is worth having? > > > Thanks, > > Matthijs > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > -- DNSimple.com http://dnsimple.com/ Twitter: @dnsimple
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
