Re: [Add] I-D Action: draft-reddy-add-enterprise-split-dns-08.txt

[Eric Orth <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 4:23 PM Paul Wouters <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Fri, 21 Jan 2022, tirumal reddy wrote:
>
> > We published -08 version of Split-Horizon DNS Configuration draft
> >
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-reddy-add-enterprise-split-dns-08
> > based on WG feedback from IETF 112.
> >
> > Key changes are:
> >
> >    *  Restricted the scope of the document to split-horizon DNS names
> that are properly rooted in the global DNS.
> >    *  Added new terminology of hybrid resolver/client, authorised split
> horizon and domain camping
> >    *  Added DNSSEC to confirm authority over the split-horizon domains
>
> I had never heard of "domain camping" before, and I wonder what is wrong
> with "domain hijacking " and "NXDOMAIN hijacking" as terms ?
>

I normally hear and think of "domain camping" as a
not-intentionally-malicious subcategory of domain hijacking where the
domain being hijacked is assumed (whether or not correctly) to not exist.
Thus whoever is setting up split-dns for a network may believe it to be a
safe and conflict-free domain to use for internal usage, but it may cause
conflicts or other issues in the future when somebody adds actual
authoritative use of the domain.  Very common (but also very non-ideal) in
split-dns scenarios.

That said, the definition in the draft seems much more generic than my
understanding of the term and possibly equivalent to my understanding of
the wider "hijacking" terminology.  The draft even gives the example of
hijacking a popular domain to monitor traffic to that domain.  Very much a
scenario where "hijacking" is a clearer description.  So maybe, per this
terminology usage, to avoid unnecessarily confusing terminology, "domain
hijacking" would be a better term for the draft to define and use?