IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] need new flag bit in EDNS, "do me no favours" (DMNF)

David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> Sun, 24 October 2010 23:28 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 9D6633A677E; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 16:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.46
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.46 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.139, 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 sXbZc8dyNXiY; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 16:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ADD13A6918; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 16:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>) id 1PA9w7-0003Aa-08 for namedroppers-data0@psg.com; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 23:25:11 +0000
Received: from trantor.virtualized.org ([204.152.189.190] helo=virtualized.org) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <drc@virtualized.org>) id 1PA9w3-0003AI-VR for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 23:25:08 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by virtualized.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E56CEDD9A4; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 16:25:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at virtualized.org
Received: from virtualized.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (trantor.virtualized.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ecwclaBz60M9; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 16:25:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.8] (c-24-130-212-17.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.130.212.17]) by virtualized.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F408EDD996; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 16:24:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [dnsext] need new flag bit in EDNS, "do me no favours" (DMNF)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <C8EA875A.83BA%roy@nominet.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 16:24:54 -0700
Cc: Paul Vixie <vixie@isc.org>, "namedroppers@ops.ietf.org" <namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8D01F5E3-F863-4873-BB0E-654FA89983F7@virtualized.org>
References: <C8EA875A.83BA%roy@nominet.org.uk>
To: Roy Arends <roy@nominet.org.uk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
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/>

On Oct 24, 2010, at 4:01 PM, Roy Arends wrote:
> On 10/24/10 6:52 PM, "Paul Vixie" <vixie@isc.org> wrote:
>> opin?  i can write a short i-d on it before beijing.

I think a short i-d would be worthwhile.

> The end-game will be applications doing their own resolving. Real control.
> No third party dependencies. No favors to ask.

And greatly reduced caching.

The problem with applications doing their own resolving is that the 'real control' implies there is someone at the other end of the application that has the understanding and knowledge to make use of that control.  Haven't we seen the implications of this approach with browsers that ask the end user whether or not to accept an SSL cert?

Regards,
-drc

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email