Subject: [dnsop] ipv6-dns-issues and misbehavior-against-aaaa

From: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 14:10:04 +0900

Hello,

At the Seoul meeting, the wg chairs asked if it makes sense to
merge draft-ietf-dnsop-misbehavior-against-aaaa-00.txt to
draft-ietf-dnsop-ipv6-dns-issues-04.txt or to keep them separate.

As I responded there, I myself do not care about either way (my
co-author who was not there may have a different opinion).  But I want
to be sure about the next step.  In my understanding, there was not a
clear consensus on this at the meeting.  Is this correct?  And if so,
how can we make a decision?

Thanks,

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					[email-masked]
.
dnsop resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop/index.html

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 10:15:22 +0200 (EET)

> how can we make a decision?

Thanks for bringing this up -- it's pretty important to get to 
consensus on this.

I was in the different meeting room around this so I don't know what
triggered this discussion.. but IMHO it makes sense to keep these
separate.  It's better to have separate documents discuss separate
issues, than trying to lump everything in one huge document.

So, at least I would prefer to keep them separate.. if it counts for 
anything.

Also note that their categories might be different: misbehaviour for
Informational, ipv6-dns-issues for either BCP or Info (not sure
which?)

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

.

---

From: Tim Chown <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 14:26:38 +0000

> So, at least I would prefer to keep them separate.. if it counts for 

In draft-ietf-dnsop-ipv6-dns-issues-04.txt:

  "This memo presents operational considerations and issues with IPv6
   Domain Name System (DNS), including a summary of special IPv6
   addresses, documentation of known DNS implementation misbehaviour,
   recommendations and considerations on how to perform DNS naming for
   service provisioning and for DNS resolver IPv6 support,
   considerations for DNS updates for both the forward and reverse
   trees, and miscellaneous issues."

So this draft already contains DNS implementation misbehaviour issues,
which are closely related to misbehavior-against-aaaa.   Given the
ipv6-dns-issues draft is an "overview" and already exists, I feel we
should incorporate misbehavior-against-aaaa into ipv6-dns-issues, 
especially if the document can contain recommendations on avoiding
(or detecting) the problem.

Tim
.

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 17:29:53 +0200 (EET)

> (or detecting) the problem.

Umm.  ipv6-dns-issues document gives a summary of 
misbehavior-against-aaaa.  Naturally, instead of giving a summary, it 
could give a full-fledged description.  But that would bloat the 
ipv6-dns-issues document by 5-10 pages.  Is that what we want?  Isn't 
it better to just give overview, and keep detailed description of 
misbehaviour in a separate document?

That's how I feel at least -- I've always envisioned ipv6-dns-issues
as "what's up with IPv6 and DNS -- if interested, look [here and
there] for more details" not "full compendium of all the gory details
of IPv6 and DNS".

.

---

From: Tim Chown <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 15:32:53 +0000

> misbehaviour in a separate document?

Hmm, well we could go into detail for any of the items summarised in
the issues draft...
 
> there] for more details" not "full compendium of all the gory details

OK, you swung me :)

Tim
.

---

From: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 22:21:53 +0900

>>>>> On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 10:15:22 +0200 (EET), 
>>>>> Pekka Savola <[email-masked]> said:

> triggered this discussion..

Actually I don't know either...the question from the chairs was a
sudden surprise to me (I may have missed something related in the
room).  That's why I'm asking the question here.

> but IMHO it makes sense to keep these

Okay, then so far

- two people prefer separating the documents (itojun said so at the
  meeting room, if I understood him correctly)
- Tim preferred merging the documents, but Pekka convinced him (not to
  do so).
- I don't care (so I can live with either way).

and so it seems to me that we should keep separating those two.

					JINMEI, Tatuya