Re: [dane] namespace management, DANE Client Authentication draft updated

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Thu, 14 January 2016 01:02 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: dane@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dane@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E42B31A875E for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 17:02:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.664
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.664 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, KHOP_DYNAMIC=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 a4IWlW0ENGwj for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 17:02:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFEC01A874F for <dane@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 17:02:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 71196 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2016 01:02:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 14 Jan 2016 01:02:00 -0000
Date: 14 Jan 2016 01:01:38 -0000
Message-ID: <20160114010138.66774.qmail@ary.lan>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dane@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <20160113223659.GB28324@mournblade.imrryr.org>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dane/79wC7BzDz4tQqGvNxbT0iHzV1BA>
Subject: Re: [dane] namespace management, DANE Client Authentication draft updated
X-BeenThere: dane@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS-based Authentication of Named Entities <dane.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dane>, <mailto:dane-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dane/>
List-Post: <mailto:dane@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dane-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane>, <mailto:dane-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 01:02:03 -0000

>Because the client prefix-label a service *name*, so so the port
>collision issue goes away.  We should not cargo-cult designs,
>the rationale has to carry over logically, and false analogies
>need to be avoided.

One man's cargo cult is another man's namespace management.  Every
existing use of _<service> names is behind a _<proto> name, and there
seems to me considerable merit to keep it that way, at the trivial
cost of a possibly uninteresting _tcp or _udp in the name.  If the
extra five bytes is an issue, I suppose we could use _c rather than
_client for the client tag.

While saving five characters was a big deal when I was programming
PDP-8's almost 50 years ago, I don't get it now.

R's,
John