Re: [dnsext] Some thoughts on the updated aliasing draft

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Tue, 29 March 2011 12:03 UTC

Return-Path: <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A78A3A683D for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 05:03:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.087, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 C30yVLjmA9nz for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 05:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ppsw-51.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-51.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.151]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E26753A6784 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 05:03:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/
Received: from hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.51]:41956) by ppsw-51.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.158]:25) with esmtpa (EXTERNAL:fanf2) id 1Q4XfB-0001vn-Y1 (Exim 4.72) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Tue, 29 Mar 2011 13:04:45 +0100
Received: from fanf2 (helo=localhost) by hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk (hermes.cam.ac.uk) with local-esmtp id 1Q4XfB-00021e-HL (Exim 4.67) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Tue, 29 Mar 2011 13:04:45 +0100
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 13:04:45 +0100
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
X-X-Sender: fanf2@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@bfk.de>
In-Reply-To: <8239m6z1x9.fsf@mid.bfk.de>
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1103291253470.3124@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <AANLkTimOKdFt9PyRD_hEdQstyak9Z-eCOAHm3FYooMjL@mail.gmail.com> <8239m6z1x9.fsf@mid.bfk.de>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LSU 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: Tony Finch <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
Cc: dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Some thoughts on the updated aliasing draft
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 12:03:10 -0000

Florian Weimer <fweimer@bfk.de> wrote:
>
> The problem is worse: applications routinely do not have access to the
> public DNS when the proposed sameness or normalization step would have
> to be performed.

I think we should be clear whether we are talking about a server
being provisioned or a client making a request.

I find it hard to believe a client has no access to the DNS when making a
request, though it might be indirectly, and possibly via an interface that
only provides access to a limited set of RR types. But any solution we
come up with has to work with existing clients or it will never be
deployable.

A server does not have to get its list of aliases from the DNS. Being able
to do so is a convenience but it is likely to be undesirable in some
situations or impossible if the server software doesn't support it.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
Wight, Portland, Plymouth: Southeast 3 or 4 veering southwest 4 or 5,
occasionally 6 in Plymouth later. Slight in Wight, otherwise slight or
moderate. Showers, fog patches. Moderate, occasionally very poor.