Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] Re: ADoT requirements for authentication?

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Thu, 31 October 2019 01:21 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.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 D2ED212011A for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Oct 2019 18:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=dP0ZnsSw; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=eElVq/fN
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 3H99c4SXkrdk for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Oct 2019 18:21:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 441A21200FE for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2019 18:21:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 35520 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2019 01:21:42 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=8abe.5dba3726.k1910; i=printer-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=pu57i2iRJFUS9XKiIEBTaUrzAh4Up4DJ0qmrRYrIU4s=; b=dP0ZnsSwecOR58jT5AOZQMK8Tyn+nQoi0MQSZlbtaKfHJiBILuhdJjCT90S9GK/SEAabCUco4nS7vHlUKtsCTXtMbVb/K3siSSbCARSVs2fYsEHrgmVQzdQQbZgXqo2iZisusqdoHJGZRpHKnnJcQuS8AN5RwN/2stXdI1ERrs4TZJVzcaTUn/+y1GMboUFDwgnD7Ff/RnCKCt0bBFPUW1oVlguc7BnneE98aIL4V7gfcRJhebBVHuMx6ocYn0GF
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=8abe.5dba3726.k1910; olt=printer-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=pu57i2iRJFUS9XKiIEBTaUrzAh4Up4DJ0qmrRYrIU4s=; b=eElVq/fNK1e6WqxFs7il0Aos/ECdqYlsJxFk7a/eCyzm1rPX0MdyLarXpNcOk4xWjAMoAgi4HnHBGUHWuCPUJO00mmetdokQOuxBJpC11FlEdRg6RVDdcQd+/iIAErTVKgyXYSq9SLud7MaA/q56PWAxa4QEzJ1VBhjZT2dk2uZIkHbk1O8zLtJ9ObwutQ2fE5KXtvW6dBz0ANGfZJATOIu5KMafhJZMHXpdeIzocVHT8V2fAnoXC1nAvznimzWW
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, printer@iecc.com) via TCP6; 31 Oct 2019 01:21:41 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 899B3DAE626; Wed, 30 Oct 2019 21:21:41 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 21:21:41 -0400
Message-Id: <20191031012141.899B3DAE626@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dns-privacy@ietf.org
Cc: watsonbladd@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CACsn0c=6Kv5j0SKJkTLxSNSPoz_uA62p1vTjWx=ccVJbnv4f7A@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/tZqv5TldnCcBynDDCDEp_Iw56K0>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] Re: ADoT requirements for authentication?
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, 31 Oct 2019 01:21:46 -0000

In article <CACsn0c=6Kv5j0SKJkTLxSNSPoz_uA62p1vTjWx=ccVJbnv4f7A@mail.gmail.com> you write:
>Encryption at the root is very possible.

Indeed, but that's not the same question as whether it's a good idea.

It is my strong impression that whatever problem you would solve with
DoT to the root can also be solved using a local copy of the root,
which has the practical advantage that you can do it right now.

Also, depending how we decide that a name server signals that it
supports DoT (or perhaps a parent gives a hint with the referral) it
might make life a lot easier if the signals don't have to start all
the way at the top.

Let's put this in the pile of things to think about later.

R's,
John