IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Add] Comparative DoH Discovery DNS RR Types

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Tue, 30 June 2020 02:25 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
X-Original-To: add@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: add@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A66B73A09F9 for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 19:25:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3L8sv9Z5gZPJ for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 19:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [IPv6:2001:559:8000:cd::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62A913A09F7 for <add@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 19:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linux-9daj.localnet (dhcp-166.access.rits.tisf.net [24.104.150.166]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (1024 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5811FB0588 for <add@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 02:25:46 +0000 (UTC)
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
To: ADD Mailing list <add@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 02:25:45 +0000
Message-ID: <2627412.DIRKxXNHPS@linux-9daj>
Organization: none
In-Reply-To: <516fcd85-2d67-e853-03b5-49220df9d878@huitema.net>
References: <7325C546-587D-4CD9-8059-0887C33F3503@cable.comcast.com> <18350.1593475069@localhost> <516fcd85-2d67-e853-03b5-49220df9d878@huitema.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/add/saawEQ-tpiPJMl6X7Fml9ctT8NU>
Subject: Re: [Add] Comparative DoH Discovery DNS RR Types
X-BeenThere: add@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Applications Doing DNS <add.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/add>, <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/add/>
List-Post: <mailto:add@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/add>, <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 02:25:51 -0000

On Tuesday, 30 June 2020 02:14:36 UTC Christian Huitema wrote:
> ... The way I understand it, Mozilla
> would rather use a well known API like getaddrinfo(), rather than a more
> capable API that supports different record types. I can guess that this
> is a software simplicity/complexity trade-off.

i don't like seeing evidence that the getdnsapi.net people wasted a decade 
building something that ended up being too complicated to go into the MPR.

in case it's not obvious: i do not think we should make "forever" decisions 
based on what programming language or system library happens to be convenient 
at this decade. (nor upon what dumbass middleboxes we're often stuck behind.)

> ...
> But I may be getting it wrong, and I would rather hear what Mozilla
> actually thinks...

i hope you're getting it wrong too, because then i would be getting it wrong, 
since i understood the mozilla corporation's comments here the same way you 
describe.

-- 
Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email