Re: [dbound] [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dcrocker-dns-perimeter-00.txt

"John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> Thu, 04 April 2019 01:00 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: dbound@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dbound@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86956120357 for <dbound@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 18:00:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com
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 mvf32TpLIhhE for <dbound@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 18:00:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F4E612034F for <dbound@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 18:00:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 1539 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2019 01:00:47 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=5ff.5ca5573f.k1904; bh=gG0TH3j1rv64bO/9jkcDMnh3vkoJo5XJSgAfChW5ng8=; b=iPH39DOotyN11SZq91tybzAxfTdbQNSIR7XaWaXxITULHU0SK3UMDqwnGDdDcNw1X8IvIR8IhyBUmENkCo/4iTKVmy27UJOrzuN0SCTHaEpbhqL0EGr1BdinLi+i/CYxAJOXdE2W0y23jWi9vzfosmbPb/JGHptAqZ6/EE/W7lA4BJtaj0BztsZ7sM+D8Ki1Pjw0rD/hf3ExMyNbTyD8IsyeNcHlrt2A34Hj1H7PF7SQ1edWQ3scYC+GhP470ig+
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 04 Apr 2019 01:00:47 -0000
Date: 3 Apr 2019 21:00:46 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1904032056230.22661@ary.qy>
From: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
Cc: "tjw ietf" <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>, dbound@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <310cc611-e1f0-2fbb-6efe-9d266869d025@dcrocker.net>
References: <20190403175820.8391420115F376@ary.qy> <2445c121-f77b-0fa2-ca6a-402479abb5a7@dcrocker.net> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1904031430270.21189@ary.qy> <7e61b445-3844-f769-6a59-16fa396388d0@dcrocker.net> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1904031459480.21189@ary.qy> <AFE01C0B-E47E-4D4E-B60C-FA0810BBE8F8@gmail.com> <310cc611-e1f0-2fbb-6efe-9d266869d025@dcrocker.net>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (OSX 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="0-1256902744-1554339647=:22661"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dbound/Ec_ECQQKngtd23c4lvPeE0kE-mo>
Subject: Re: [dbound] [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dcrocker-dns-perimeter-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dbound@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS tree bounds <dbound.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dbound>, <mailto:dbound-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dbound/>
List-Post: <mailto:dbound@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dbound-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dbound>, <mailto:dbound-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2019 01:00:52 -0000

On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 4/3/2019 12:19 PM, tjw ietf wrote:
>>  I was going to say CAA but that’s 6 years old.
> 5 was a random number.  I was merely meaning 'recent'.
>
> But suggesting CAA in response to my query means that you think RFC 6844 has 
> received widespread -- ie, at scale -- end to end adoption and use.

Every CA is supposed to check CAA records before issuing a cert to see if 
they're allowed to issue it.  I know Let's Encrypt does and I suppose I 
can ask them how many CAA records they see.

> Please forgive my skepticism.

Well, OK, here's a question for you: when's the last time an RFC added a 
feature to the DNS that puts records in the additional section triggered 
by a specific label in the query?  I'm reasonably sure the answer is 
"never" but you might ask dnsop to be sure.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly