Re: [dns-privacy] DoH vs DoT at IMC 2019

Puneet Sood <puneets@google.com> Mon, 23 September 2019 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <puneets@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 D53F61200D7 for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 08:02:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 G7Jsh4hNvNkg for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 08:02:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2e]) (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 B011012086A for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 08:02:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com with SMTP id l2so9622781vsr.8 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 08:02:17 -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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oewfe+GPsNaLAk1vzDyieg4Ub1ggYzwFlE4ASaQT50E=; b=dKQL6jldyAUt+nqT1qlw7bpYmp3reFnXL4eMF2e+UIc6rOhbMvAD8MqI0YNmu19Gzk MecUqH1muXGq3/yGa6yQD4PHQ11tRTTHPJwT02Kl8UKq1Pn1ZRDGO+IwGhCCg04ZKgB0 V0HnB2DWUDUXzBSNnYYVyVrTC6hgIw3+RQlk38ArpWRzwB8uS0rv7+si8ijW/wBgf0/C xHYWH//NVGRyqEqAS/RpveRVcfTdHMDvInK4MBT+iEBVBrF1MSiDPnI8x24O8HdwnqEA uk0q5Q3yfthdgGUMasqrq+v5aySWo7+hf8WRmOtbLoYLAaUIJywYW8PAIvmOMUDXJ1pP ng9g==
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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oewfe+GPsNaLAk1vzDyieg4Ub1ggYzwFlE4ASaQT50E=; b=Pnxjp/b+0LJE5uk067ZW4BoN4dJMq+Rrd015Uc2I68G2hHw5L8w3gY1tPkvQFS0FaQ Gh9QBYr9NEIZAV2oZVwyi4hLeJSBS3rw9TT1YJrxFJWi83erP9bEn+4zWvmLv/7QL5t4 R0kCzl3qeyHuuWrOs7mZZz1t7agbHNX8QcZQotpU+hker4AmnDX7DKEKTy8LslGsHqn3 xki/ywsBfwQdyH0Am8ZHuAEdCZoeCVaRtG78hoTB3dPZXfXv8zakWXnLOYo7F8fgYQXD 1mEkOd9dZUcgdLMWZM9JHuarl+NPc1w6BEPuTbEwsLJc9K/B1qtok2/vfoSV+xqtJZrp bIjg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUURW+sZF3fNQXZu7veZ86C4koTeN34lLmhUPUqfJIIjcdOQ1d5 PtwIgA8QyxcSadBrBLiLppd8ezlUey4zMTeBmOF0mA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzWWTHZ9W07QhSHpx3JGgf0gAnXuyo5/Px3ckEr7XV5IQig7AzV0lLarlVLGkGAiBHh36wXjs2nBe2WS0B9PTQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:f9cf:: with SMTP id c15mr10209079vsq.240.1569250936188; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 08:02:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <7A5A1175-1AEB-4A04-BC75-169BD9A321FD@qmul.ac.uk> <24050ee6-ba3c-2880-dfd5-050c01d41ac7@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <24050ee6-ba3c-2880-dfd5-050c01d41ac7@nic.cz>
From: Puneet Sood <puneets@google.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2019 11:02:04 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+9_gVv7vZ8DtXXBOTzA5Sy89Vsr4vUC7+gofX85ctTNPLwc9Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?VmxhZGltw61yIMSMdW7DoXQ=?= <vladimir.cunat+ietf@nic.cz>
Cc: Timm Boettger <timm.boettger@qmul.ac.uk>, "dns-privacy@ietf.org" <dns-privacy@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/zWJquV42Kmixv3iXgFXGrFc-Qts>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] DoH vs DoT at IMC 2019
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, 23 Sep 2019 15:02:29 -0000

On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 11:15 AM Vladimír Čunát
<vladimir.cunat+ietf@nic.cz>; wrote:
>
> > [...] Implementing out-of-order delivery via TLS is akin to
> > (re-)implementing the stream multiplexing part of SCTP, QUIC or
> > HTTP/2.0. We believe that this is one of the main reasons why
> > DNS-over-TLS failed to gain significant traction.
>
> The last sentence really surprises me.  I'm actually not convinced that
> protocol details like this can *directly* affect large-scale adoption,
> so to find this it might be more interesting to ask the most popular DNS
> clients why they chose the way they did.  AFAIK it's not too common to
> support both (equally).  I would think the main reasons will be far from
> the suggested one, but I didn't try to find out... except that for web
> browsers it's probably natural to prefer DoH, as they're all built
> around http(s).

The fact that browsers are under active development and prefer HTTPS
while client OS DNS APIs have seen minimal changes (barring the
efforts of the getdns project, support for DoT in Android 9) in the
past decade is a more likely reason for the differences in DoH and DoT
adoption.

-Puneet

>
> --Vladimir
>
> _______________________________________________
> dns-privacy mailing list
> dns-privacy@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy