IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard

Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> Tue, 27 August 2013 15:59 UTC

Return-Path: <jabley@hopcount.ca>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 351A521E80F0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 08:59:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j6LEt2xu4WNn for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 08:59:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qa0-x236.google.com (mail-qa0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7C7C11E81A2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 08:59:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id bn16so1184354qab.20 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 08:59:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopcount.ca; s=google; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=CgJjNsLuGYSj55CL2vsIwYQsbadOSrT09jJ/hys+SFE=; b=TaVPEcu77f2V8B8ttaj6/P9fLBs3tsMNTHWWjL9tkOnc85unzhQyf7ntcqY3Yt0UiT 9hBEo0q99i+no7gs1Nj+OtU/I5nRq8GfhWmXO2t2QHZwvFmPMzjdImt54IBmUzJ+qi10 qSuZtELxboTmxblAJvd5pZHzzSIs2qOygBV90=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to; bh=CgJjNsLuGYSj55CL2vsIwYQsbadOSrT09jJ/hys+SFE=; b=Ac8qPkDnU8tYawKqNN+y0ohN73xV+DMOKW7YCjMwq8eiY5gEN/sdc5BgFQit8CUUNT Ib8gdnQESQjj72lYJMoWewf00dr+8MqhBFlWOajcnP6RrNQRUA9JkHzxizO+4UHRBMSW TP1wYrxXzFdzZ6iBz7vcYsecMmq05qpMTCpxOX1HJSsD/z3VBskwiagFCJCoxTKEPjuC oorqAqIKuPZxWzE9xAnhc5/3s0MyCMP55oH7UVJ1Mcz9bISCY3Z/OKjWu13KUXRkLiRI RE5nHP/RDEUuw59mfVGL7RztuYvbcCEfFFtCa0fJi4sk1WtJqNOLzaoeE3AQPx784bNB uCqg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkfRK6zItkYoSGlOx3UnHsRzYMqfadZ8Pl7I4JAlerf99UqmR3EdwcVIoF3txZmAAipKATN
X-Received: by 10.224.74.4 with SMTP id s4mr23966072qaj.51.1377619183022; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 08:59:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [199.212.90.52] ([135.23.68.78]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id g3sm30144545qas.6.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 27 Aug 2013 08:59:42 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130826182352.0cac3298@elandnews.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 11:59:41 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <330A924C-17DA-4082-92AD-FDB6EF09192A@hopcount.ca>
References: <9884B9CD-0ED3-4D89-A100-58D05EA4BC98@gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130823234808.0b7cfed0@elandnews.com> <C5D75C5C-D468-4104-A478-0A055F43AED9@gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130826182352.0cac3298@elandnews.com>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 15:59:46 -0000

On 2013-08-26, at 22:28, S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> wrote:

>> The permitted size of the UDP packet is NOT 512 octets.  That is the permitted size of the DNS Message.  DNS Message is not the same thing as a UDP packet.
> 
>>>> Per RFC1035
>>>> Section 2.3.4. Size limits
>>>> UDP messages    512 octets or less
> 
> I'll suggest UDP message.

The consistent word for this in 1035 is simply "message". "DNS Message" is in more common use today, I would say.

The text you quoted from 1035 is most usefully interpreted as a contraction of "messages sent over UDP"; "UDP message" really doesn't have a well-understood meaning, and is easily conflated with "UDP datagram" which does not have a size limitation of 512 bytes.


Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email