[as112-ops] [DNSOP] Adoption of <draft-wkumari-dnsop-omniscient-as112-01.txt> as a WG work item? (fwd)

[Aleksi Suhonen]

Hello,

On 03/15/2013 05:11 PM, William F. Maton Sotomayor wrote:
> (Aleksi where are you?  Care to contribute?)

I've had too many other things on my plate. Sorry.

On 2013-02-22, at 15:14, "Dickson, Brian" <bdickson at verisign.com> wrote:
>> Instead of delegating to omniscient AS112 servers, what about doing a
>> DNAME to a specific target "foo" (replace "foo" with what you will) in
>> the DNS tree?

Joe Able wrote:
> I've thought about this a bit, and I've decided that I quite like it.
>
> So, if I can paraphrase to ensure we're talking about the same thing,
> the current working omniscient plan involves:
>
>   - custom code

Has anyone been working on this in the mean time? An earlier email 
referred to the following code, but it doesn't do what was advertised:

http://code.google.com/p/evldns/source/browse/trunk/as112d.c

Joe Abley wrote:
> Your idea, however, involves
>
>   - hosting a known, empty zone on known nameservers
>   - pseudo-delegating new worthy zones by provisioning a DNAME at a
> suitable point in another zone
>   - no custom code
>   - no protocol discomfort, so long as we don't gag too badly on the use
> of DNAME

I understand that DNAMEs cause auto-generated CNAMEs which could be 
abused to seriously clog up the caches of recursing DNS servers if used 
with IPv6 reverse zones. Is this true?

Joe Abley wrote:
> Your idea has advantages, then.
>
> Anybody could decide to sink traffic for any name at AS112++ servers by
> installing a similar DNAME. This would become a standard way to dispense
> with and junk DNS traffic; perhaps we need to think about writing this
> up as AS112.ARPA and make it a more general mechanism than just a place
> to sink default-local-zones traffic.

For the record, I am all for this idea.

> Suppose AS112.ARPA is delegated to the nameservers BLACKHOLE-3.IANA.ORG
> and BLACKHOLE-4.IANA.ORG, and the AS112.ARPA zone is empty apart from an
> SOA (SOA.MNAME = PRISONER-2.IANA.ORG). The names of the servers don't
> matter much, except that they need not to be named under AS112.ARPA
> (since that would pollute the empty zone with A and AAAA RRSets).

BTW, blackhole-{3,4} only have AAAA records. I am of the opinion that we 
should request IANA to reserve IPv4 addresses for those names as well. 
Regardless of which model we go for or what zones are delegated there.

I also think it would be beneficial to have the proper local mirror name 
and the proper local mirror management email contacts in the SOA for 
AS112.ARPA. (Except if the zone is signed and AXFR'ed from ICANN.)

Yours,

-- 
	+358 4567 02048 / http://www.trex.fi/
	Aleksi Suhonen / TREX Regional Exchanges Oy

     `What I need,' shouted Ford, by way of clarifying his
     previous remarks, `is a strong drink and a peer-group.'
        -- Douglas Adams, Life the Universe and Everything