Re: [apps-discuss] [taugh.com-standards] Comments on draft-levine-orgboundary

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Mon, 22 July 2013 02:43 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCB2621F9D56 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 19:43:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.84
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.84 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_INFO=1.448, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311]
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 ffhD2j4dVuo7 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 19:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (ow5p.x.rootbsd.net [208.79.81.114]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EEFC21F9D09 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 19:43:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (c-75-69-155-67.hsd1.nh.comcast.net [75.69.155.67]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6DA718A031 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 02:43:24 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 22:43:25 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20130722024325.GB40429@mx1.yitter.info>
References: <CAL0qLwau4LT04pPZkn7uKUrVcT0mzZbY3vHtT45w=c6+AtYytg@mail.gmail.com> <20130722012418.54689.qmail@joyce.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130722012418.54689.qmail@joyce.lan>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] [taugh.com-standards] Comments on draft-levine-orgboundary
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 02:43:30 -0000

On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 01:24:18AM -0000, John Levine wrote:
 
> Of course, this assumes that you believe that there actually isn't
> anything interesting below .com.  If you look at the current public
> suffix list, they don't.

Yes, this is what has worried me too.  Brian Dickson raised this issue
at length to me off list; I was hoping he'd chime in some more here.

> It's a mess.  My impression is that the DNS is robust enough that it's
> not worth a lot of effort to try to cut down query rates unless you
> know that the query rate is totally absurd.

Or at least, if the DNS is the right place to put this data, then it
had _better_ be robust enough for that.  Certainly, there are lots of
people on the Internet today with 30s TTLs on their zones.  (Much
below 30 and you start to get wildly unpredictable behaviour.)

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com