Re: [dnsext] DTLS alternative to DNS-Curve

Paul Vixie <vixie@isc.org> Fri, 17 September 2010 05:13 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D7803A691D; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 22:13:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.498
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.498 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.101, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l1ZbACvqkiii; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 22:13:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A12F23A6849; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 22:13:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>) id 1OwTA5-0000XE-4q for namedroppers-data0@psg.com; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 05:07:01 +0000
Received: from [2001:4f8:3:bb:230:48ff:fe5a:2f38] (helo=nsa.vix.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <vixie@vix.com>) id 1OwTA2-0000Wv-IC for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 05:06:58 +0000
Received: from nsa.vix.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nsa.vix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F11EEA1021; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 05:06:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vixie@nsa.vix.com)
From: Paul Vixie <vixie@isc.org>
To: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
cc: Nicholas Weaver <nweaver@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU>, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>, Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>, namedroppers <namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] DTLS alternative to DNS-Curve
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 16 Sep 2010 19:33:36 -0400." <61C4AE93-1540-4234-8AE5-B8E1BFFAD2A7@hopcount.ca>
References: <AANLkTin2xY+cAck+3sWcn8hibDrZbXLzttznGM9sRQz+@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1009161925200.31356@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <AANLkTikEq8KVQxzAo3e_RJOWbYvVGrXjLnVCooFs3H=q@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1009162003370.31356@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <AANLkTimD=Mcx-COzENWWd1GeESCW8hW189uRJE6eDanB@mail.gmail.com> <02A6011E-033F-40E6-B937-49A56F6D48D1@icsi.berkeley.edu> <61C4AE93-1540-4234-8AE5-B8E1BFFAD2A7@hopcount.ca>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.1; nil; GNU Emacs 23.1.1
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 05:06:56 +0000
Message-ID: <89155.1284700016@nsa.vix.com>
Sender: owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <namedroppers.ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: To unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
List-Unsubscribe: the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
List-Archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

> From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>;
> Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 19:33:36 -0400
> 
> > Overall, this suggests the following:
> > 
> > New RTYPEs can be used, but reluctantly.
> 
> To me what you described is actually an argument to promote the use of
> new RTYPEs, not to discourage it.

strong +1.

> Not seeing widespread of new RTYPEs in the wild is presumably what led to
> the entrenched belief that it's reasonable to filter on RTYPE in
> middleboxes. The way to stamp out this thinking is to reverse the trend.

yes.