From: Ben Schwartz <bem...@meta.com> Date: Wednesday, February 14, 2024 at 11:34 To: Edward Lewis <edward.le...@icann.org>, Manu Bretelle <chan...@gmail.com> Cc: "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Re: General comment about downgrades vs. setting expectations in protocol definitions
> For the "testing" flag, the descriptive information is basically "this > endpoint does not carry my SLA". >You can see a variation on this problem in draft-ietf-tls-svcb-ech In the DNS environment, we assume no SLA. The protocol assumes the worst. That’s why there are so many retries, so many alternative sources and so much tolerance for error. It would be hard to tell if a service is in testing or not, so the protocol doesn’t try. For the ECH example, it sounds like it matters in that environment - and that is fine. It’s different. Which leads me back to - I don’t see the use case for “The "testing" flag for Service Binding (SVCB) Records” in the context of DNS or DELEG. A flag is a flag, having it mean “I’m testing” I get. But I don’t see that notice helping the DNS, and applying the banner of the “DNS Camel”, I don’t think it should be added. …OTOH, seeing that this is a SVCB flag, perhaps you have other environments where such a flag would be useful. I just don’t see it in the DNS.
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
