Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any: points from Richard Gibson

2017-07-27 Thread Tony Finch
Joe Abley wrote: > On 26 Jul 2017, at 13:28, Richard Gibson wrote: > > > > I remain concerned about issuing incomplete responses to ANY queries > > without indication of such, and predict that it will hinder > > operational problem investigation and remediation (especially > > pertaining to IPv4/

Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any: points from Richard Gibson

2017-07-26 Thread Joe Abley
On 26 Jul 2017, at 14:50, Richard Gibson wrote: > Yes, color me corrected on vocabulary but unconvinced on interference... > those slides seem to mostly demonstrate noncompliance by name servers > theirselves with respect to EDNS data in queries, whereas the data I'm > suggesting would only a

Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any: points from Richard Gibson

2017-07-26 Thread Richard Gibson
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Joe Abley wrote: > > On 26 Jul 2017, at 13:28, Richard Gibson wrote: > > > The need for such a signal also came up recently in > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wkumari-dnsop-multiple- > responses-05#section-10 . But in this case particularly, middleboxes > sho

Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any: points from Richard Gibson

2017-07-26 Thread Joe Abley
On 26 Jul 2017, at 13:28, Richard Gibson wrote: > The need for such a signal also came up recently in > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wkumari-dnsop-multiple-responses-05#section-10 > . But in this case particularly, middleboxes should be a complete > non-issue... anyone expecting QTYPE=AN

Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any: points from Richard Gibson

2017-07-26 Thread Richard Gibson
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Joe Abley wrote: > >- There is no mechanism for signaling section 4.1/ section 4.3 > "partial > >response" behavior to clients (e.g., a new OPT record EDNS header flag > >bit > > dns-parameters.xhtm

[DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any: points from Richard Gibson

2017-07-25 Thread Joe Abley
Hi Richard, all, I foolishly allowed Tim to pay for lunch and therefore have been tricked into doing actual work. There are a couple more of these inbound to the list, one for each of the e-mails containing points that were found not to have been addressed in -04. My goal is to identify some ki