Re: [Din] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-mayrhofer-did-dns-01.txt

Melinda Shore <> Fri, 15 February 2019 19:47 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB01A130FF2 for <>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 11:47:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CA_QXf5nnMXU for <>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 11:47:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::543]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBC10131000 for <>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 11:47:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id m1so5263265pgq.8 for <>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 11:47:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=z54FQAJNdCSUIrYq2YsY99KsIFBu5Cuxhv42fPIuKKY=; b=YgDe0EwfLjvp1hX57up2cr0j7hq3UbA+A713fPYzlL7YRm0IuIpQgv3MzDVsZU2GKR fFHvWNEpHRXy5CNLBR0rxJE1rve7yRWcYZtnT1kTt6Sqw+2kzEx5bBHd6n8mPMQYS2DT L+pYgS3dxEyHFWqcU6343iwjavVb1l/1aMWResuv3akj+FHFGMHoPnVenKUro4EJ1eaH BweUMzj89H3qNWCMwezfZlYHpXemOspa+Q5Ob4Ut46Xz6A3Aksyk5ojM9IKKDVtAgyBM Ii/14qAXv4paRQ4JUBJP28eKTweTuzIM7sqfN9Jo9i0zBg9oCqLrY/3/Vr+BaG+t7YdG sFug==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=z54FQAJNdCSUIrYq2YsY99KsIFBu5Cuxhv42fPIuKKY=; b=D2I7GTXCTp1HmHEHXz5ULMjdj4ZJ7/duD7XYvzeMXpl7ZlyGaFZQgbwRHevR4wFhIz Ri8R8gV5Nl/ULPjuf3PbLFvQn3jQzLkkTqIQweINLlYR5J3iX6OWRARB8i5tVjc6VFdr 0F5cLqOfE+a8xOeHGkRpqaJmgZuOLiUV7my6JqN5iS/xuklUVkf7C19ZTHXmb/5sZtKn KKno9ERK/zQukkxDHcbr20RN39m2mdK8nChw4HYfNOfBcTqXBbo6m72FGkN3aUEGl74p rricJYQCDVeoZ4tBg9x7D1xlw/SJECca+ZHnyhKtZsZVV0akh5JR/SDus/iKMSQhdHCe 05CQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuYD5jrVGYCc64eIUyiR+uLTnu1K7VrKUB7CpcmSvAo6qWQX/Tdt kDS56n4fmHmUUXOAb+b2CeOb
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3Ia2LrvCoROuELnnvXrpITQGRY8Qs+IT1HjQdFp00fpp0vYXqAsR/5nOY0cc9xQ8AhMB86g/cg==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:b94c:: with SMTP id v12mr6839382pgo.221.1550260048170; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 11:47:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Melindas-MacBook-Pro.local ([]) by with ESMTPSA id p2sm8361866pfp.125.2019. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 15 Feb 2019 11:47:27 -0800 (PST)
To: Paul Wouters <>, Stephane Bortzmeyer <>
Cc: IETF DNSOP WG <>,, Alexander Mayrhofer <>
References: <> <> <> <>
From: Melinda Shore <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 10:47:26 -0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Din] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-mayrhofer-did-dns-01.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of distributed Internet Infrastructure approaches, aspects such as Service Federation, and underlying technologies" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 19:47:31 -0000

On 2/15/19 9:46 AM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> This technically also allows one to separate the two DNS zones more
> clearly (and could even be managed by a different group)
> I'm really on the fence for this document. On the one hand, it is good
> to have a memorable decentralized identifier, but on the other hand if
> you rely on DNS (and DNSSEC), is this identifier really still
> decentralised in the "we don't trust the USG or Verisign" way ?

I think the question of whether or not to provide
decentralized identifiers and whether or not this proposal
delivers on the "decentralized" claim is out of our hands,
as the core spec (which has a lot of additional problems)
comes out of the W3C.  I think the IETF's involvement is
probably limited to their use of DNS in the resolution


p.s. and it's probably worth pointing out that this work is
being done in a W3C community group, so until it looks like
it's actually going to be published as a WC3 spec I'm not
sure I'd like to see IETF working group resources being
spent on this.

Software longa, hardware brevis

PGP key fingerprint  4F68 2D93 2A17 96F8 20F2
                     34C0 DFB8 9172 9A76 DB8F