Re: [dnsext] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-vandergaast-edns-client-ip-00.txt

[Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]>]

At 1:57 AM +1100 2/2/10, Martin Barry wrote:
>$quoted_author = "OndÞej Sur˜" ;
>>
>> On 28.1.2010 21:19, Nicholas Weaver wrote:
>> >The client has ALREADY given up the privacy to the third party DNS
>> >resolver, the additional privacy leakage thereafter would be trivial.
>>
>> I strongly disagree with this statement.  You can have all sorts of
>> agreements with third party DNS resolver provider, including privacy
>> agreement, etc.  This is one-to-one relationship.  On the other hand
>> giving your IP address (or netblock) to random third party
>> authoritative DNS providers is a different thing in my view, since
>> you give your IP address/netblock to every-typo-you-make
>> authoritative DNS server.
>
>I'm not sure I understand this concern.
>
>A DNS request is usually followed by a connection from an application.
>
>Given that the edns-client-ip option in the draft would apply a netmask,
>surely that is providing less information to the service operator than the
>subsequent connection to their service.

This assumes that they system that is making the DNS request is the one that is about to make the connection. That is the common, but not universal, case.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium