Re: [dns-privacy] Discovery of DNS over (not 53) and ALPN

Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com> Mon, 16 December 2019 02:40 UTC

Return-Path: <pusateri@bangj.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 23D98120046 for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Dec 2019 18:40:45 -0800 (PST)
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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bangj.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 rVryBexJttxg for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Dec 2019 18:40:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from oj.bangj.com (69-77-154-174.static.skybest.com [69.77.154.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED8D61200A3 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Dec 2019 18:40:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.16.10.110] (mta-107-13-246-59.nc.rr.com [107.13.246.59]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by oj.bangj.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9D0F3310B5; Sun, 15 Dec 2019 21:40:41 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=bangj.com; s=201907; t=1576464041; bh=evJQX4guBkmIOg4drFnsB4Zz1Quve5hUKZcvbVGOEXo=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References:From; b=ezsu6HRh/SKrmGFAN6yWmVdux1sBD2KtGRemcRtStU0TOmEscn6uTE9ltjTI+0ui2 f84cS7l3UuX9oM6MInLNZxWz6f1F4E6dv/EKy5o9Z4Iz1AMrBpsWakOtZ8IG3b6Xac R0k0YSIbf7CIXDjPFwYmbzH4XokIHrpBzWzUNpk3COmupFdedyYnK5QBOR0SuCb/LT BevyiaPWy4hkbmf4rlattiN/2ExhJShbFJsLGk1c3cQoZzT4pdJjqdq957X70/M/My +vzjfSnhkTG3J/5dmcydqZE0+hvr+AEenq5I991XQ2Wvm8DrGiK+7X71yE9YD3uhPn WpPn0XdYWGqXQ==
From: Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com>
Message-Id: <57E4F3C9-B313-4F8F-B7AE-F815A8966BA7@bangj.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A9210289-805D-4BB5-B8D0-0356A96D50CC"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.40.2.2.4\))
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 21:40:40 -0500
In-Reply-To: <1e2a07b6-89cc-40aa-a617-db39765779a6@www.fastmail.com>
Cc: dns-privacy@ietf.org
To: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
References: <CA+9kkMAmsK746ViRb9tXkJX+t_paOGpWCN3i78WK_t86bLGUnQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKC-DJhiZAv8gESrhvUc5v86TcRXrfASq4ujQ3BxOYnuENrBjg@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMA1LC2tMKjqF5Lvthhs+3iNS=hUZLoJXqZG9F8COutDUA@mail.gmail.com> <1e2a07b6-89cc-40aa-a617-db39765779a6@www.fastmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.40.2.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/qKajD9GrahChxof_9zZd-e6JuSQ>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] Discovery of DNS over (not 53) and ALPN
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: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 02:40:45 -0000


> On Dec 15, 2019, at 7:35 PM, Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote:
> 
>> So, let's back up a step: are people interested in using DHCP and RA as 
>> part of the discovery story here or not?
> 
> I am.
> 
> I tend to think that https://thpts.github.io/draft-peterson-dot-dhcp/draft-peterson-dot-dhcp.html is a reasonable start here.  Sure, it makes some assumptions, and leaves some of the harder 8310-style questions unanswered, but that's where I think we should be paying more attention anyway.

This is at least the fourth list that DoT discovery over DHCP has been discussed (see DoH, DNSOP, and DRIU).

In the previous three times, it was rejected as not a trustworthy source.

Willem and I wrote a draft on DHCP options that was well received by DHCP experts but not well received by DNS folks.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pusateri-dhc-dns-driu-00 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pusateri-dhc-dns-driu-00>

We presented it at IETF 102 in Montréal (July 2018). Looking at the DRIU mailing list, both Martin Thomason and Ted Hardie were active and so you may remember it and the poor reception it received. Our slides are here:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-driu-dhcpv6-dns-discovery-00

This draft could be easily revived but that doesn’t change the objections we received back then.

I think Ted Lemon led the charge against this. Here are his slides:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-driu-when-to-use-dhcp-00 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-driu-when-to-use-dhcp-00>

and here is the video presentation. Ted Lemon starts at 33:13

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfEX8zuoRAA <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfEX8zuoRAA>


Tom