Re: [DNSOP] Using NSEC authoritatively - cutting down on NXD requests...

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 09:36:10AM -0400, Bob Harold wrote a message of 80 lines which said: > vixie-dnsext-resimprove addresses the case where a single name > 'b.example' and everything below it do not exist, found by a query > for 'b.example'. Or a query for

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 03:39:33AM -0400, Tim Wicinski wrote a message of 36 lines which said: > The WGLC ended on this, and there was strong consensus to move this > document forward. Can you clarify what was the resolution for the problem of matching replies to

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis

Hi The WGLC ended on this, and there was strong consensus to move this document forward. Thanks to all the folks who gave very constructive comments, and thanks to the authors for addressing all the issues raised during the process. I'll be submitting this shortly. tim On 10/9/15 3:21

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive

Hi The WGLC ended on this, and there was strong consensus to move this document forward. Thanks to all the folks who gave very constructive comments, and thanks to the authors for addressing all the issues raised during the process. I'll be submitting this shortly. tim On 10/5/15 4:08

Re: [DNSOP] Using NSEC authoritatively - cutting down on NXD requests...

On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 09:16:26 AM Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 09:36:10AM -0400, > Bob Harold wrote > > a message of 80 lines which said: > > vixie-dnsext-resimprove addresses the case where a single name > > 'b.example' and everything below

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis

There is an -04 version which missed the cut off but will be the one we submit: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/DNSOP/draft-5966-bis/master/draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-04.txt https://github.com/DNSOP/draft-5966-bis/pull/24/files#diff-1 I believe Sara addresses all concerns. tim On 10/27/15

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis

Stephane and all, On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 09:19:55 +0100 Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 03:39:33AM -0400, > Tim Wicinski wrote > a message of 36 lines which said: > > > The WGLC ended on this, and there was strong consensus to move

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis

>> >>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 03:39:33AM -0400, >>> Tim Wicinski wrote >>> >>> Can you clarify what was the resolution for the problem of matching >>> replies to questions? I believe that most people (like me) are happy >>> with the ID+QNAME+QCLASS+transport_tuple of >>>

Re: [DNSOP] draft-fujiwara-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse-01.txt

sanity check, someone? i believe that in dnssec, an empty non-terminal has a proof that the name exists, and a proof that there are no RR's. thus, vastly different from the signaling for NXDOMAIN. Yes, it does. With NSEC3 it is an explicit proof. With NSEC you have to read between the

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-cookies-06.txt

Hi Stephane, Sorry for slow response, I've been traveling on vacation. On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 05:33:49PM -0400, > Donald Eastlake wrote > a message of 59 lines which said: > >> This revision

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-cookies-06.txt

As a aside. EDNS cookie responses with server cookies have been seen outside of test servers. Two .au servers from those serving Alexa top 1M zones responded with server cookies. discountbookshop.com.au. @223.27.29.230 (ns.discountbookshop.com.au.): dns=ok edns=ok edns1=ok edns@512=ok