IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Asrg] DNS over SCTP (was: Re: DNS-based Email Sender Authentication Mechanisms: a Critical Review

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Thu, 28 May 2009 13:18 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72A2A3A6D43 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 May 2009 06:18:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.251, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DdaH3bhI-DK7 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 May 2009 06:18:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2.nic.fr (mx2.nic.fr [192.134.4.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3614A3A6A29 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 28 May 2009 06:18:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 6028B1C0157; Thu, 28 May 2009 15:15:09 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from relay1.nic.fr (relay1.nic.fr [192.134.4.162]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B80B1C009F; Thu, 28 May 2009 15:15:09 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay1.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5917CA1D9A5; Thu, 28 May 2009 15:15:09 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 15:15:09 +0200
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Message-ID: <20090528131509.GA13521@nic.fr>
References: <003d01c9dd01$bf3531d0$800c6f0a@china.huawei.com> <4A1A45BA.5030704@swin.edu.au> <3be421270905250718y5d62f6d5odb6f2bebecf418d0@mail.gmail.com> <6684E747-55CB-4BB3-B838-9F4FE906AFE7@mail-abuse.org> <200905251603.MAA16221@Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG> <CCE0A3E1-4BCB-460C-AEA0-6548BB4AE8FE@mail-abuse.org> <4A1D64C9.5060505@tana.it> <47BC2197-472E-4615-97D2-F7E42B8F3B7D@mail-abuse.org> <4A1E8BD3.8000103@tana.it>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4A1E8BD3.8000103@tana.it>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 5.0.1
X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.26-1-686 i686
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 30 May 2009 16:32:53 -0700
Cc: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Asrg] DNS over SCTP (was: Re: DNS-based Email Sender Authentication Mechanisms: a Critical Review
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 13:18:35 -0000

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 03:04:19PM +0200,
 Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> wrote 
 a message of 30 lines which said:

> I thought TCP was the default when the UDP message size is not
> enough.  

Well, in theory, it should be EDNS0 (standardized in the previous
century) but, in practice, it has deployment issues, like everything
which was invented after Jon Postel's death.

> It seems that DNS over SCTP would solve 90% of the problems with 10%
> of the efforts and resources required to implement DNSSEC. However,
> I hear more often about the latter than the former. How come?

I've read this message via the IETF general mailing list and so I
missed the beginning. In what way can you compare DNSSEC (which
provides object security) and SCTP or TCP (which provide a better
channel security for DNS)?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email