[Add] Zone ownership in DNS server discovery

[Tommy Jensen <[e-mail]>]

Changing subject line to avoid the noise on Martin's single use case. This is a separate topic.

>From the WG charter:

> Define a mechanism that allows communication of DNS resolver
> information to clients for use in selection decisions. This could be
> part of the mechanism used for discovery, above

If I know "doh.example.com" is authoritative for "foo.example.com", I may prefer to take *.foo.example.com queries directly to it instead of using an intermediary recursive. I consider this to be separate from policies such as "I perform filtering" because being authoritative or designated isn't a policy / requirement and I can still choose to use an intermediate recursive if I want. This information can also be readily authenticated since TLS already gives us a mechanism for conveying and validating ownership claims relative to a domain name (as opposed to a network name).

Thanks,
Tommy

================================================

The latest in Windows Internet Protocols:

  Native gRPC support: https://aka.ms/grpcblogpost

  DNS over HTTPS: https://aka.ms/dohblogpost


________________________________
From: Jim Reid <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 8:37 AM
To: Tommy Jensen <[e-mail]>
Cc: ADD Mailing list <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Add] [EXTERNAL] My single use case



> On 10 Sep 2020, at 16:27, Tommy Jensen <Jensen.Thomas=[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > Specifically, I want to NOT learn about whether the resolver does [...]
>
> +1, I couldn't agree more.

Ditto.

> One exception would be zone ownership for me as I don't consider that a policy, but I agree that's a scenario separate from the one you are describing and should be kept separate.

What has zone ownership - whatever that means - got to do with resolution transports or resolver selection? How is it relevant to this WG?