IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] Intermediate proposal (what I was saying at the mic)

Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com> Tue, 03 August 2021 21:06 UTC

Return-Path: <bemasc@google.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 573163A32D4 for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 14:06:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -18.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-18.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.499, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 wB123SbtkuKj for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 14:06:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x430.google.com (mail-wr1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::430]) (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 E6DF33A32CE for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 14:06:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x430.google.com with SMTP id d8so26680273wrm.4 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Tue, 03 Aug 2021 14:06:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=m7f/Sqtv+uzXUGCqfz6M3NfS+FRd+qzwkVOeTOsa9Rs=; b=l8641HSngG34GAedgCGstqlGwKPVyzgiOvvdMS0wokvtMlztLcjypvlJjg01t6uyjG qn3LGo9dY4ylBGLl9XwlYuUJBHh/5UaNo9qlulskyaq4KCKMUC4Ob56s09FPABWR0JWE 2bkyV1fsfDRLTNKdbj+WtRxdJrDBkpMI3DygUahkEp0VJfNrGkutZ58UoMcaiwhW054m 3rcbFtHiWylDlG8s39Cz3HvkzSepu/lwNCxB2cbNyIuEO36t9xdlSMpcqcG0+i7nHOJM 6Ub83PvOkHrm4Jgl8VY2RNrighVo67NbnHbGQezpDwGKIcH1VsbWrVwBM9hqvR2mLlmP 9Eqw==
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=m7f/Sqtv+uzXUGCqfz6M3NfS+FRd+qzwkVOeTOsa9Rs=; b=rmlJVKhmL0ftpL2YMPx6/2TCGB26QF+S/3eegR1/XbOfvVBSdBGSKmUTVVEzquch9V PFOuW9R9tIhLuZ6dQTiZLGHfIhC0hFJXVqh9HzFHIiGMW80nv7krzhh5E8nmZj2Zw2zy t6XRgxwzg3KW1ErlbvnZKJgVqahJY3EH1FU3Rij8n7Uva4rQAOMIAlUuDzHCmuCDv+By tt/p1KqG19dqY15qZ5u9QIDwAsP81aBIUp/9LJuD/2j4SDFID8W5BeAhMNs8WDIbHSQu i5F7gQH08do/2Bz2eOcU3dw0mBELKI+BXOB8MEnf362REOf91Gf0gQOBA6X4Rhr/+iu0 BmxQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531pUDPVjgPakipZB9a81oeLKHtFjVHLRiqdkc8zFe6xu0xjjisR AKqASGsEdGsCLva61lkh5RndYG/hYYyue3eBbgg9iQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwr9c/CPFJzDL6KoKlotMku2qX211t1kcELyTXzjPfsoIZXDCPfM+4ToD2gHYK5G2AnMJSjaVw+vRYiQ9H0n4Y=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:d20e:: with SMTP id j14mr24063524wrh.177.1628024799906; Tue, 03 Aug 2021 14:06:39 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CABcZeBNRZsyjd-M_hKOwxdqY=Y7oZs5-d4waqPHb9gO-GJNV+Q@mail.gmail.com> <8b2ac283-614e-40d2-b6bf-5e67d5324aaa@www.fastmail.com> <CABcZeBM+rBLgUs+xzyhTOjCFuPdjUDPDMeFL6CAXanDaicC+Pg@mail.gmail.com> <CAHbrMsA3ROoeeDXm_HpXP73uFjVrEQUycQ0OR0e6JE0hCoS1sw@mail.gmail.com> <5EEBC284-71B3-4308-B5C6-AF3847A6ED36@icann.org>
In-Reply-To: <5EEBC284-71B3-4308-B5C6-AF3847A6ED36@icann.org>
From: Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2021 17:06:28 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHbrMsCN9N=sV2xtc5b9QFeSSCsr65wXEEZ+d6DSTNbRxRt8GQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
Cc: DNS Privacy Working Group <dns-privacy@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="000000000000e7888205c8ae0f4f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/ArRcfZNZgtHrTYBKTnU5q2fUk3c>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] Intermediate proposal (what I was saying at the mic)
X-BeenThere: dns-privacy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Addition of privacy to the DNS protocol <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: Tue, 03 Aug 2021 21:06:48 -0000

On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 4:55 PM Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org> wrote:

> If the WG is going to go to DS in the parent to have a signed signaling
> response, it would make sense that the signal in the child have an
> identical format. If we go with that, I'd rather see CDS be used in the
> child instead of SVCB.
>

I disagree.  CDS is explicitly a signal from the Child to the Parent.  It's
literally in the name of the RR type.  I would not want all the resolvers
in the world to be reading CDS records as part of the iterative resolution
process.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email