Re: [dbound] department of poor memory, was Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dcrocker-dns-perimeter-00.txt

"John R. Levine" <> Thu, 04 April 2019 13:43 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E17D1205F7 for <>; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 06:43:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 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] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4H9XZ0i-U3Vc for <>; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 06:43:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [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 (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20EA11205DD for <>; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 06:43:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 41914 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2019 13:43:48 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple;; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=a3b6.5ca60a14.k1904; bh=VYa3wT1hV2Ca3wfRVFSxqhEm5MxICKRVru7+F/ZjPKU=; b=dsVofiYgBk82fvljpjKLB+CBm/G33QC5Le2IdgEg7LuwtdRjW1zj3IE0Cj2yRX4ANzGwYHSelmDsHdgZIsCkKtzayJfmDH1z6UY5zgJueTNgFFHlPd1CC4QkiqfeOnSNEHlu9oI9/0gGZQ6CjInSMsZ0gDNwPzNHMSy60FRTGnRveImAnS+TuV7IYk5u+SVgvFJ5VwRtoj9fC3w9yHChUts4aIhn5tO/lOQeLxgAv6G1P+1QIvKdOo+9niFkVsb4
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 04 Apr 2019 13:43:47 -0000
Date: 4 Apr 2019 09:43:47 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1904040938520.24158@ary.qy>
From: "John R. Levine" <>
Cc: "tjw ietf" <>,
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1904032056230.22661@ary.qy>
References: <20190403175820.8391420115F376@ary.qy> <> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1904031430270.21189@ary.qy> <> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1904031459480.21189@ary.qy> <> <> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1904032056230.22661@ary.qy>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (OSX 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="0-1347384637-1554385427=:24158"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dbound] department of poor memory, was Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dcrocker-dns-perimeter-00.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS tree bounds <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2019 13:43:53 -0000

I just reread my draft draft-levine-dbound-dns-01 and see that I'd 
forgotten that it says that the design would work the same with TXT 
records as with a new rrtype, since the nodes are all under prefixed 
_bound names.  See section 9 on page 8.

If you want to compare apples to apples, you might want to adjust the 
draft to compare your prefixed TXT records to my prefixed TXT records.


On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, John R. Levine wrote:
> 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.