Re: [DNSOP] Followup One Week Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation
All I know this was a bit longer than a week, but we wanted to receive some confirmations from folks with questions on implementations. We've received that, and the chairs feel the consensus is to move forward. Thanks tim On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 2:27 PM Tim Wicinski wrote: > (forgive my missing subject previously) > > > All > > After pulling this back (Thanks Peter again), we went back to the authors > and > > In the case of the DF bit, the wording is changed from > "UDP responders are RECOMMENDED" to "UDP responders MAY" > > They also added some additional text in the security section. > > The authors relabeled the suggestions using "R1" -> "R12", which > actually was better than my idea. > > The diffs can be found here: > > > https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation-14=draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation-15=--html > > > This will be a one week working group followup last call. > We want to make sure the implementers etc are happy with these changes. > > This Working Group Last Call will end on September 20, 2023 > > thanks > > tim > ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Re: [DNSOP] Followup One Week Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation
On 29. 09. 23 9:15, Peter van Dijk wrote: On Tue, 2023-09-19 at 14:27 -0400, Tim Wicinski wrote: In the case of the DF bit, the wording is changed from "UDP responders are RECOMMENDED" to "UDP responders MAY" With this change, the document appears to in fact document Best Current Practice. The added note in the Security Considerations about DF makes sense to me - we will have to see if anybody is willing to do the DF experiment for real, of course. I agree. -- Petr Špaček Internet Systems Consortium ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Re: [DNSOP] Followup One Week Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation
I see nothing wrong with the current version (-15), and as I posted before, I consider it a nice reference for DNS fragmentation. (I'm a bit late, but at least for the record.) --Vladimir ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Re: [DNSOP] Followup One Week Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation
On Tue, 2023-09-19 at 14:27 -0400, Tim Wicinski wrote: > In the case of the DF bit, the wording is changed from > "UDP responders are RECOMMENDED" to "UDP responders MAY" With this change, the document appears to in fact document Best Current Practice. The added note in the Security Considerations about DF makes sense to me - we will have to see if anybody is willing to do the DF experiment for real, of course. Kind regards, -- Peter van Dijk PowerDNS.com B.V. - https://www.powerdns.com/ ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
[DNSOP] Followup One Week Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation
(forgive my missing subject previously) All After pulling this back (Thanks Peter again), we went back to the authors and In the case of the DF bit, the wording is changed from "UDP responders are RECOMMENDED" to "UDP responders MAY" They also added some additional text in the security section. The authors relabeled the suggestions using "R1" -> "R12", which actually was better than my idea. The diffs can be found here: https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation-14=draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation-15=--html This will be a one week working group followup last call. We want to make sure the implementers etc are happy with these changes. This Working Group Last Call will end on September 20, 2023 thanks tim ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
