IETF Logo Mail Archive

[dns-privacy] Some additional signalling ideas

Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com> Sun, 31 March 2019 12:48 UTC

Return-Path: <watsonbladd@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 67A25120199 for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 05:48:37 -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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 8C2De-WhsYjm for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 05:48:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x229.google.com (mail-lj1-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::229]) (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 B9A81120308 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 05:48:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x229.google.com with SMTP id h16so5624495ljg.11 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 05:48:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=l7CLS3LGbjcWiWzHsE/8DqEJYYpY8h8J365s6P8WADc=; b=VmDKnc1kiHWT++XNZr0zfyOCB4vTNIZ/omgZsqZgkfW8aw2PNq6ttqXuojPjsKiWkW xSWOuq7GQVaqK0AYz3Ifqn/nt5SDQAtCxSoALn4Eg2c47p6LUaLabF82uBD9CR04uNKv zHVhtD0O/6QCjryf5aw9taOdslaR3Rl7+faQ/j1UD9gE5zRi5LNHHw28LBG40k/j62vo pCF8/3u3zoYX5jR6Yruxa/7WMVHSjbyGcLWmmTAUgQbqECt5ISO1BpsJJnDFTgdFATRY nt6RePm76Hqm2cnravlrERg1M+LMh0xnJxV6N3wro5j46KgqlQ3d05TegWTdqvRp0dJ5 ngWQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=l7CLS3LGbjcWiWzHsE/8DqEJYYpY8h8J365s6P8WADc=; b=mF9AM1r5ASlc/8xXohAinOPGwSZn8SLUy7logBUD5hRR9og8txP1TGvlRliF6V3pyC oFmWocfH7y4qc5jYIOjvyih1mKWpXAxLI6WB3lg094ZxYXxggKeNeT28aO7XAXMVAr7B mStzHbo0xozXCy66yHOtNNSfqVkL3+6M7zDTIn2wlNOh+cSXESvRUCXSKupUMyvrsrrJ PBudkrmW84VLFt4hFAXIoeW3rXEYr24fN2W9Qaa0xtwh7bxhhRmtS8CaFIsLDZWhhofC 9WmzAS8Iq+5aZzeYLx94FBs91WFJ9uhO0yW0plgc7ta7urI9ZkIas9f/xKfIFJN34874 1beg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVKkbZCxq3Zr6n5OG0lM/x/uguTDKS5n7dHFUKxVjrrRkD6qSeB MWuYHAO2TuVkyQHDcacoe8Xf+UwD430eehw1ZlcWVQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxz5+gJ2Gr514aDQruYRysVjWMqCm8H7RO/IFXmosljnw9/onC0Nz6y1VuLioPUuXTcVAI3/UNbt7ztJandG4s=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:91d2:: with SMTP id u18mr32474522ljg.161.1554036512628; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 05:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 05:48:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CACsn0ck-SNweieak5Fn7TOLLZTvsQNo6+w3nezxKuZPq0Z4QNA@mail.gmail.com>
To: dns-privacy@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/8Wakp5eZtVoIcjBHmpAJrpYKcuc>
Subject: [dns-privacy] Some additional signalling ideas
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: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 12:48:44 -0000

Dear all,
Please rip these ideas to shreds:
1) An extra bit in a response for "you could have asked over TLS"
2) An extra field when looking up the nameserver for  "you can ask
that server over TLS"
3) An extra field/bit/convention for "this nameserver supports tls"
(like tls-ns vs ns)

Sincerely,
Watson Lad

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email