FYI: IANA delegation procedure for the root zone and ipv6 glue
Colleagues, The final version of the new IANA delegation data procedure is now on-line at http://www.iana.org/procedures/delegation-data.html. Regards, Andrei Robachevsky RIPE NCC
Hello, On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 09:49:57AM +0200, Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
The final version of the new IANA delegation data procedure is now on-line at http://www.iana.org/procedures/delegation-data.html.
the document states that, "The procedures described apply equally to all NS, glue (A/AAAA), or other records published in the root zone" Now, I was wondering whether IPv6 glue records have already been added in the root zone. To my knowledge not, is that correct? Are there TLDs who already submitted IPv6 glue records? Best regards, -Jeroen- -- Jeroen Valcke
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 10:51:55AM +0200, Jeroen Valcke <jeroen.valcke@belnet.be> wrote a message of 18 lines which said:
Now, I was wondering whether IPv6 glue records have already been added in the root zone. To my knowledge not, is that correct?
Correct. ftp://rs.internic.net/domain/root.zone.gz
Are there TLDs who already submitted IPv6 glue records?
We did, on 17th February 2003.
Andrei,
on-line at http://www.iana.org/procedures/delegation-data.html.
thanks for the pointer! Now, what are "reasonable queries"? -Peter
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 04:11:24PM +0200, Peter Koch <pk@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> wrote a message of 8 lines which said:
Now, what are "reasonable queries"?
<guess wild="1"> <reasonable> www.ripe.net </reasonable> <reasonable> karrenberg.ripe.net </reasonable> <unreasonable> very-very-long-name-unreasonable-but-only-intended-to-break-the-512-bytes-limit-of-DNS-without-EDNS0.ripe.net </unreasonable> </guess>
Your wild guess is wrong, there are no queries possible that exceeds > 512 udp size. A QNAME has a maximum length of 255. The wording used "reasonable queries" originates in Ronald van der Pol's paper on 'Adding IPv6 glue to the root zone'. My wild guess is that Ronald might shed some light on this. Gut feeling is that reasonable in the context of Ronalds paper means queries that conform to all DNS specification. Roy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> To: "Peter Koch" <pk@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> Cc: <dns-wg@ripe.net> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 4:18 PM Subject: [dns-wg] Re: FYI: IANA delegation procedure for the root zone and ipv6 glue
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 04:11:24PM +0200, Peter Koch <pk@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> wrote a message of 8 lines which said:
Now, what are "reasonable queries"?
<guess wild="1"> <reasonable> www.ripe.net </reasonable> <reasonable> karrenberg.ripe.net </reasonable> <unreasonable>
very-very-long-name-unreasonable-but-only-intended-to-break-the-512-bytes-li mit-of-DNS-without-EDNS0.ripe.net
</unreasonable> </guess>
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 04:54:02PM +0200, Roy Arends <roy@dnss.ec> wrote a message of 40 lines which said:
Your wild guess is wrong, there are no queries possible that exceeds
512 udp size.
I never said so, I showed a query that could make a break of the 512-bytes limit, *when echoed in the reply*. And, BTW, my query was illegal but for another reason, left as an exercice.
Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> wrote:
<guess wild="1">
I was serious.
<unreasonable> very-very-long-name-unreasonable-but-only-intended-to-break-the-512-bytes-lim it-of-DNS-without-EDNS0.ripe.net </unreasonable>
Now, what about _ldap._tcp.Standardname-des-ersten-Standorts._sites.dc._msdcs.office.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE? The name is "long" but not "only-intended-to-break-the-512-bytes-limit". -Peter
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 07:11:51PM +0200, Peter Koch <pk@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> wrote a message of 17 lines which said:
Now, what about _ldap._tcp.Standardname-des-ersten-Standorts._sites.dc._msdcs.office.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE?
The name is "long" but not "only-intended-to-break-the-512-bytes-limit".
You're right, SRV records, IDN, DNSSEC, domain names in german, and of course IPv6 have all the potential to "innocently" break the 512-bytes limit. That's why all DNS software should support EDNS0, IMHO.
Hi Peter & all, On 13 Jul, Peter Koch wrote: | Andrei, | | > on-line at http://www.iana.org/procedures/delegation-data.html. | | thanks for the pointer! | Now, what are "reasonable queries"? ==> If my understanding is correct, "reasonable queries" are queries that don't trigger DNS responses whose length exceeds 512 octets. You may find more details on average and worst case queries in Kato-Vixie draft which expired but which is archived here : http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/03jul/I-D/draft-ietf-dnsop-respsize-00.txt You may also find more theoritical computation related to DNS response size and name compression at the following URL : http://w6.nic.fr/dnsv6/resp-size.html Mohsen.
On 13.07 16:11, Peter Koch wrote:
Andrei, thanks for the pointer! Now, what are "reasonable queries"?
[sorry, huge mail backlog] This wording indeed has its origin in section 1 of http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ipv6/publications/v6rootglue.pdf which explains why *any* query would be a stupid wording. Hence this wording was the most reasonable (sic ;-). Daniel
Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
This wording indeed has its origin in section 1 of http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ipv6/publications/v6rootglue.pdf
I had already read that paper. The term "reasonable queries" appears exactly once and even then it is not defined but states that "response sizes for reasonable queries do not exceed the 512 octet limit". That's where we started.
which explains why *any* query would be a stupid wording.
The rest of your paper suggests that "reasonable" may mean a query pattern that is found in real life at a (subset of the) root nameserver(s). At least that would sound not unreasonable to me. But we're talking about a policy document here - why does that use/have to use such fuzzy wording? -Peter
On 22.07 11:52, Peter Koch wrote:
... But we're talking about a policy document here - why does that use/have to use such fuzzy wording?
Because non-fuzzy wording that serves the purpose does not exist. The IANA has to make a judgement call here and it is better to make that explicit in the policy than to keep it obscure. People should take notice and indeed you and others have noticed it correctly. If necessary the IANA may indeed use real life queries at the time to make that call. I doubt whether it will ever be necesaary in practise but it might be. Daniel PS: If your question is whether we trust the IANA with this judgement call, that is something different. I am afraid that we do not have much choice in this particular matter. Someone has to make that call. I hope that IANA will make the right calls and (re-)gain our confidence.
participants (7)
-
Andrei Robachevsky -
Daniel Karrenberg -
Jeroen Valcke -
Mohsen Souissi -
Peter Koch -
Roy Arends -
Stephane Bortzmeyer