Re: [dns-privacy] Root Server Operators Statement on DNS Encryption

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Thu, 01 April 2021 13:05 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
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 045453A108F for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 06:05:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 HCMs8OE1N4ME for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 06:05:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9EF703A1086 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 06:05:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 2D7E02810AB; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:05:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 2792528159F; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:05:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (relay01.prive.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:15::11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FDFE2810AB; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:05:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.users.prive.nic.fr [10.10.86.133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19F6060911A0; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:05:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0DFC03FEC5; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:04:38 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:04:38 +0200
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>, "dns-privacy@ietf.org" <dns-privacy@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20210401130438.GC10236@nic.fr>
References: <96c2475d-ad93-a442-2003-db6f8782e450@cs.tcd.ie> <CAMGpriXdU7_mJh8CQvSiZGQaDUD9aZF=0iYu0yKBS06khAHgng@mail.gmail.com> <4094551f-4b39-a996-f12f-8c5317c4fe21@nic.cz> <20210331092449.GD10597@nic.fr> <cefd04bf-8685-1894-ef3a-b61ce6a37167@innovationslab.net> <155BAF8D-9F65-4C5C-9EB1-58EFD70827B5@rfc1035.com> <c1ae3401-2565-016b-7acc-4891d0bde067@cs.tcd.ie> <a8eacd5988df461c9ec3c858dd426bb7@verisign.com> <20210331130534.GA28113@nic.fr> <514BEB95-A207-482B-88FA-D420EE66A152@rfc1035.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <514BEB95-A207-482B-88FA-D420EE66A152@rfc1035.com>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 10.8
X-Kernel: Linux 4.19.0-14-amd64 x86_64
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.2
X-PMX-Version: 6.4.9.2830568, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2021.4.1.125715, AntiVirus-Engine: 5.82.0, AntiVirus-Data: 2021.4.1.5820000
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/S4YC9nJH9tGhgNpXULXLjEwOCvg>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] Root Server Operators Statement on DNS Encryption
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, 01 Apr 2021 13:05:10 -0000

On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 02:32:46PM +0100,
 Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> wrote 
 a message of 13 lines which said:

> > RFC 7626 (the threat model and problem analysis that some people
> > claim is missing) is clear (section 2.5.2 for instance).
> 
> RFC7626 is 6 years old.

RFC 793 is 39 years old. Let's drop TCP and move to QUIC (the RFCs are
in the RCF-EDITOR state).

And I'm too charitable to mention the age of DNS RFCs.

> It predates the DoH and DoT (and soon DoQ) specs.

So what? 

> Some other risks have changed since 2015 too.

Please be specific and mention them.

> It’s not your fault that fine RFC has been OBE. :-)

I don't remember receving it from Elisabeth II
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_British_Empire>