Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-add-split-horizon-authority-06
review-ietf-add-split-horizon-authority-06-intdir-lc-halley-2023-11-29-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-add-split-horizon-authority
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Last Call Review
Team Internet Area Directorate (intdir)
Deadline 2023-12-01
Requested 2023-11-09
Requested by David C Lawrence
Authors Tirumaleswar Reddy.K , Dan Wing , Kevin Smith , Benjamin M. Schwartz
I-D last updated 2023-11-29
Completed reviews Intdir Last Call review of -06 by Bob Halley (diff)
Dnsdir Last Call review of -06 by Anthony Somerset (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -06 by Tianran Zhou (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Watson Ladd (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Bob Halley
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-add-split-horizon-authority by Internet Area Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-dir/mm02KeccfYmLrHFoXyXU1zNDjck
Reviewed revision 06 (document currently at 10)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2023-11-29
review-ietf-add-split-horizon-authority-06-intdir-lc-halley-2023-11-29-00
I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for
<draft-ietf-add-split-horizon-authority-06.txt>. These comments were written
primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area Directors. Document editors and
shepherd(s) should treat these comments just like they would treat comments
from any other IETF contributors and resolve them along with any other Last
Call comments that have been received. For more details on the INT Directorate,
see https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/>.

Based on my review, if I was on the IESG I would ballot this document as YES.

The following are other issues I found with this document that SHOULD be
corrected before publication:

The example has the wrong value for the token.  The authors have already
corrected this for future versions of the draft.

The duration of authorization is not discussed explicitly in the document.  The
natural assumption would be that it is limited to the DNS record lifetime, but
I could also imagine it being a matter of local policy or being incorporated
into the claim.  It would be nice if the document said something on this topic,
but it's not a showstopper for me.

It might be good to have a version in the token format, though the
"_splitdns-challenge" label could also be updated in the future if needed, e.g.
to "_splitdns-challenge-v2".