To:
dnsop@cafax.se
From:
Rob Austein <sra+dnsop@hactrn.net>
Date:
Sun, 15 Jun 2003 13:52:24 -0400
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
User-Agent:
Wanderlust/2.10.0 (Venus) Emacs/20.7 Mule/4.0 (HANANOEN)
Subject:
DNSOP minutes from IETF 56
It looks like the DNSOP minutes from IETF 56 were sent to the list but never arrived (sigh), so here they are (again). ======== Domain Name System Operations (DNSOP) Chairs: Dave Meyer and Rob Austein Minutes: Sean McCreary (with minor edits by by chairs) Dave introduced himself and Rob Austein, the new DNSOP chairs. Dave presented the agenda. Agenda very tight due to short meeting slot. Sean McCreary kindly volunteered to take notes. ======== Alain Durand presented draft-ietf-dnsop-ipv6-dns-issues-02.txt <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dnsop-ipv6-dns-issues-02.txt> "IPv6 DNS transition issues" Rob Austein: Draft discusses two issues Dual stacking (we had consensus on coexistence plan in previous mtgs); Stuff about the reverse tree. Would it be useful to split these two into separate drafts? Rob asked for a hum. Clear consensus was for a split. Alain asked for ISPs to send comments to the mailing list. ======== Randy Bush presented DNS issues for 6to4 draft-moore-6to4-dns-03.txt 6to4 delegations should come from same place as IPv4 reverse delegations What if upstream refuses to deal w/v6? Then go up the tree towards the root until you reach someone who cares. This will force the registries to do direct delegations to end sites. draft-ymbk-6to-4-arpa-delegation-00.txt Alain Durand: What about delegations for dynamically allocated addresses? Randy "Let's not create problems for a simple hack that works." Dave called for a hum. No consensus in room for adopting these drafts as working group documents. Discussion to continue on mailing list. ================ Matt Larson asked if draft-ietf-dnsop-bad-dns-res-00.txt should be resubmitted, as it has expired. Rob: It should be if people are willing to work on it, and asked for a hum. Appeared to be consensus to continue work on this document. Matt will resubmit it. ============== Akira Kato presented draft-kato-dnsop-local-zones-00.txt, "Operational Guidelines For `Local' DNS Zones". The pseudo-TLDs ".local" and ".localhost" are generating significant load on the root servers. Rob Austein asked if Apple's "Rendezvous" uses port 53. Stuart Cheshire said rendezvous uses port 5353 for queries. Geoff Huston asked whether the proposal to "delegate" .local to AS112 servers means creating a new TLD. Paul Vixie: We propose to add a top level domain, but a useless one that always returns NXDOMAIN. The only purpose is to reduce the load on the root servers. Stuart: This can be solved in the resolver by filtering queries to the .local pseudo-TLD, or by changing the root infrastructure. Topic too new and complex for immediate hum on whether WG should take this on. Discussion to continue on mailing list. ============== Paul Vixie spoke on a proto-draft he had posted to the mailing list on size issues in DNS response messages. Paul's analysis suggests that the naming scheme used by the name servers for the root zone (x.root-servers.net) saves a lot of space in response packets, which increases the number of name name servers that can be listed for a zone. Paul suggests that we should encourage others to adopt this scheme. If the IDN effort increases the size of the A record, reducing the number that will fit in a response packet. How many A records are too few? Is only one too few? If one is an acceptable number, what kind of engineering changes can be made so that the A record returned is useful to the client. If this is relevant to the working group, we should adopt it and advance it as soon as possible. Discussion taken to mailing list. ======================== Johan Ihren presented draft-ihren-dnsext-threshold-validation-00.txt <http://www.autonomica.se/~johani/talks/ietf56-threshold-validation.pdf> A discussion of how to use DNSSEC key signing keys (KSKs) to improve reliability in case some private keys are compromised, and during key rollovers. Johan then presented draft-ietf-dnsop-interim-signed-root-01.txt This is a clarification of the earlier draft. Johan asked if threshold validation should be taken as a work item for the working group (as a general topic, not just Johan's draft). Consensus was yes. ======================= Rob asked if the working group should produce a requirements draft for Autoconf/bootstrap/dynamic update/dns discovery with IPv6 clients. Rob believes the work group should work on this. Alain Durand: Does this make more sense to work on in a working group dedicated to finding a general solution to this problem? Rob: There are DNS-specific issues that need to be identified. Stuart Cheshire: Determining DNS parameters is a major hole in current IPv6 autoconfig protocols. Bob Hinden agreed with Stuart, and added that once a scheme is defined and deployed it will be possible to to a lot more with autoconfiguration for v6 clients . Erik Nordmark: I've tried to raise interest in solving the generic problem and not succeeded. There is interest in solving the specific part of the problem for DNS. Mike Patton: DNS itself is a leveraging thing that is really needed, other complications will produce a heavyweight solution. People will want a lightweight solution anyway. Rob called for a hum. Consensus was that the working group should work on this. =========================== Alain Durand presented draft-durand-dnsop-dynreverse-00.txt He asked that this be adopted as a working group document. No consensus for or against. Rob deferred a decision until there is more discussion on the mailing list. ============================= Jae-Hoon Jeong presented draft-jeong-hmipv6-dns-optimization-00.txt A scheme for supplying DNS services in a mobile IP environment. Rob deferred adoption of the document to a mailing list discussion. ============================= draft-warnicke-network-dns-resolution-00.txt An update for RFC1101, a scheme for finding the default gateway for a client's local LAN. Rob: This is a request for review of the propsal, not a request to for the working group to adopt the document as a work item. ============================ As the previous speakers had run over, Rob and Dave deferred the charter discussion that had been on the agenda. Charter discussion will take place on the mailing list. #---------------------------------------------------------------------- # To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.