IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dns-privacy] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-03.txt

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Mon, 29 January 2018 15:50 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 A515412ECA0 for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 07:50:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, 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 yCPw7KIVKuOQ for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 07:50:14 -0800 (PST)
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 627DE12EC70 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 07:50:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 34615280A96; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:49:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 2E89B2824E5; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:49:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (unknown [10.1.50.11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27D72280A96; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:49:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.users.prive.nic.fr [10.10.86.133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24F0861083E0; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:49:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1C06C4014F; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:49:59 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:49:59 +0100
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
Cc: "dns-privacy@ietf.org" <dns-privacy@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20180129154959.jxmzytdz575yqfla@nic.fr>
References: <233e0c90-41c0-07c5-9960-2a5cae6fa30a@innovationslab.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <233e0c90-41c0-07c5-9960-2a5cae6fa30a@innovationslab.net>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3
X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-5-amd64 x86_64
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.002325, version=1.2.2
X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2018.1.29.154515
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/pC0OpcYBrXLvGqJ5_TI3frmZOkU>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-03.txt
X-BeenThere: dns-privacy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 15:50:21 -0000

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:29:29AM -0500,
 Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> wrote 
 a message of 76 lines which said:

>      This message starts a two week WG Last Call on advancing:
> 
>         Title           : Padding Policy for EDNS(0)
>         Author          : Alexander Mayrhofer
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-03.txt

Executive summary: OK for me, seems ready.

Some remarks, none of them blocking.

* I would prefer 4.1 "no padding" and 4.2 "fixed length padding" to be
moved to an appendix to emphasize they are mentioned just for
completeness, not for actual implementation.

* a RFC 7942 Implementation Status section could be cool, quoting
<http://edns0-padding.org/implementations/>

* there is no mention of RFC 7858. Is padding useful except when the
data is encrypted? I don't think so. (Stephen Farrell made a similar
remark.)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email