Re: [dns-privacy] [dhcwg] WGLC started -- draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-12

Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 13 May 2021 01:48 UTC

Return-Path: <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDDE73A132A; Wed, 12 May 2021 18:48:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 4iGqmplzamZr; Wed, 12 May 2021 18:48:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x830.google.com (mail-qt1-x830.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::830]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 320E23A1324; Wed, 12 May 2021 18:48:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x830.google.com with SMTP id g13so18764452qts.4; Wed, 12 May 2021 18:48:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xCt7PFtfeWyCvYzweptIQYBFDLPplM9q/ufZyVCaEfg=; b=ldq80WCd4w7u6cv6zt6O6Id1G+LRowUQls8GcSBBtyXmlpOwVLa2vBsWiOTEOJ/XGc ncN/t1hjAFW1TO8RnHfp+Vz0jRV0n2/+cHwpYhvyr62x6VNltkLWlUnBK0jXRwjUrsMJ uX+uK1rcwlGfdOWA5fL1AGQgx+JxcDGwC6/q+jTfzvB2y61daNOE5fyyiYtVJL+UfjSV YzfsXLw/090Fz+QHg1ieISe0UBShHimZjR0nKVm7in8oh4lgKgaZjutgtu8CSDFO4QGe 2gVFjiOWiqySPMJ2B1PV+7PTlTaiWWoxzCZBP941MTx4PORF7w82r9PwwtShXu9oS4vz E+BQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xCt7PFtfeWyCvYzweptIQYBFDLPplM9q/ufZyVCaEfg=; b=YEeo7Eiytmp96LHRoXqEoRhLW7Sasm+uL7lYHNl9GT2tEFjsS6aYmohd5YLRI5i1RG 3afTWdj7WtqJDKKYd5+dt8khHpY1qrxKsd6qjiXisk+2SYO4eDe1hViNw7hZqZlWru5C zAgLHuKKXoaduquE2yWMxgdYTgXIzcjID2iMTtwUjQ0b0ujGwKQpC/c6I7tYm3+fElbn WE/xefc8Y0ZlIe8XwGl1plG9s4pdJ57kCe6LcEejmzL84VP9Qt2KrjVELF73AKNPAell 8HC7IIsRQGbhYJfZP+9U+3q2W2NkzFL+yqvb22uCd39vqgz0zW2opy1HSL8Mn5bRY7rT M+7Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532AzEeu6qhxdjnSBzeJH1WqYqtFEFTihnzAovX1vId8ZFd4AOAD ea7dESDD3TDNZ4J2qlwuFP0AonJDGTSYTO3TSXQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzUryuJhnvk7fG+llw+hdU+GjGqjQzYCYTXKwPb/QUaMwVsmQywFSOLwE2y3a+XN+DPUIAEapqFhWSlGn5cp4c=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:11cd:: with SMTP id n13mr8235336qtk.37.1620870484349; Wed, 12 May 2021 18:48:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BN7PR11MB25479A9DA04F1D961A2A33ADCF599@BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <8746.1620229451@localhost> <DC8B3D00-DCED-4556-866C-58789126556E@fugue.com> <9020.1620241831@localhost> <CADZyTk=_L74+brzGBra7nj=q8MUh+0erywQdSu=a3UmAfscNgg@mail.gmail.com> <BL1PR11MB5494814D3BB0554E78ADEEE5CF529@BL1PR11MB5494.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BL1PR11MB5494814D3BB0554E78ADEEE5CF529@BL1PR11MB5494.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
From: Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 21:47:53 -0400
Message-ID: <CADZyTkkyWps-ZhH5hoki5R80BiyQRHLCdfWyC+F3EYb81x-k6w@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>, "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "dns-privacy@ietf.org" <dns-privacy@ietf.org>, "homenet@ietf.org" <homenet@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007256a105c22c5147"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/5IlIvFihgzjPGZkIIaYWk832csw>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] [dhcwg] WGLC started -- draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-12
X-BeenThere: dns-privacy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dns-privacy.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dns-privacy>, <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dns-privacy/>
List-Post: <mailto:dns-privacy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy>, <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 May 2021 01:48:12 -0000

Thanks Bernie, in any case for raising this. It is always good information
to process and think of carefully before bringing any conclusion.
Yours,
Daniel

On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 1:46 PM Bernie Volz (volz) <volz@cisco.com> wrote:

> Regarding RSOO, that’s fine if it doesn’t meet your needs. Just wanted to
> raise it as it probably isn’t considered as often as it should be.
>
>
>
>    - Bernie
>
>
>
> *From: *Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Wednesday, May 12, 2021 at 1:11 PM
> *To: *Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
> *Cc: *Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>om>, int-area@ietf.org <int-area@ietf.org>rg>,
> dhcwg@ietf.org <dhcwg@ietf.org>rg>, dns-privacy@ietf.org <
> dns-privacy@ietf.org>gt;, Bernie Volz (volz) <volz@cisco.com>om>,
> homenet@ietf.org <homenet@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [dhcwg] WGLC started --
> draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-12
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Thank you all for the feedbacks. I will perform the editorial once we have
> settled the terminology.
>
> Regarding the use of a DHCP Relay, we could of course make a use case of
> it, but I believe it would go beyond the simplicity of the targeted
> architecture and I would rather not consider this as RSOO enabled.
>
>
>
> Yours,
> Daniel
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 3:10 PM Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
> wrote:
>
>
> Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:
>     > On May 5, 2021, at 11:44 AM, Michael Richardson <
> mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
>     > wrote:
>     >> The end user might suffer slightly by having locally served reverse
>     >> names that are no longer connected: they should obsolete that zone
>     >> when they realize that their PD hasn't been renewed, until such
> time,
>     >> (if it was a flash renumber), they would be right to think that they
>     >> legitimately control them.
>
>     > In practice I don’t think this is an issue. The reverse lookup is
>     > usually triggered by receipt of a message from an IP address, so as
>     > long as the IP address is still in use internally, the presence of
> the
>     > reverse zone is wanted. When the address changes, the old zone
> becomes
>     > obsolete whether it continues to be served or not. The likelihood of
>     > the zone being re-allocated to some other network for which the
>     > original network will then do a reverse lookup is very small, so I
>     > don’t think there’s any reason to be concerned about this.
>
> I agree with you completely.
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
>            Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Daniel Migault
>
> Ericsson
>


-- 
Daniel Migault
Ericsson