Re: [dnsext] we need help to make names the same, was draft-yao-dnsext-identical-resolution-02 comment

Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Thu, 17 February 2011 02:50 UTC

Return-Path: <marka@isc.org>
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 12A2D3A6EEB for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 18:50:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.567
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.567 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.032, 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 ucZT3LpAHnOV for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 18:50:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ams1.isc.org (mx.ams1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:500:60::65]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 865183A6E8D for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 18:50:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bikeshed.isc.org (bikeshed.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:d::19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "bikeshed.isc.org", Issuer "ISC CA" (verified OK)) by mx.ams1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93A4A5F98F3; Thu, 17 Feb 2011 02:50:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org)
Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (drugs.dv.isc.org [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:820:ea06:88ff:fef3:4f9c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F0D0216C1E; Thu, 17 Feb 2011 02:50:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org)
Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by drugs.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DF1DA41D18; Thu, 17 Feb 2011 13:50:52 +1100 (EST)
To: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
References: <4D5B5E81.1050602@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <20110216073338.7251.qmail@joyce.lan> <F21692535B1A478F95D9E3AA048E8037@ics.forth.gr><alpine.BSF.2.00.1102160944390.62118@joyce.lan>
In-reply-to: Your message of "16 Feb 2011 09:57:03 -0800." <alpine.BSF.2.00.1102160944390.62118@joyce.lan>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 13:50:52 +1100
Message-Id: <20110217025052.3DF1DA41D18@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Cc: dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] we need help to make names the same, was draft-yao-dnsext-identical-resolution-02 comment
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: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 02:50:45 -0000

In message <alpine.BSF.2.00.1102160944390.62118@joyce.lan>, "John R. Levine" wr
ites:
> > The number of these domain names varies from two (or four if a final sigma
> > is present) to some tens of domains, not millions and certainly not
> > billions.
> 
> Well, yes, but that's in one component.  If someone has a name A.B.C.gr, 
> where each of A B C has ten variants, now there's a thousand equivalent 
> names.  I would think that a design that handled the variants in C but not 
> in A and B is not worth implementing.
> 
> If you only care about C, you can do that with bundling, have the registry 
> assign all variants of a requested name to the registrant, and let the 
> registrant deal with making them the same, by copies of the zone.  It's 
> not particularly elegant, but it requires no changes to existing protocol 
> and the software is not very complicated.
> 
> > We asked for a DNS rr that will allow two, three, four, or tens of 
> > chosen domain names to act as if they were interchangeable in all the 
> > branches of the domain name tree, starting from the top. They could be 
> > perfectly normal Latin domain names that point to the same services and 
> > the administrator decides to administer them as one.
> 
> Except that, as often noted, if the servers they point to don't have some 
> way to discover that the names are intended to be equivalent, the services 
> won't work.  The assumptions so far seem to be either that the services 
> are something like telnet that doesn't care what its name is, or that 
> they'll be manually provisioned, which seems unlikely to work except in 
> the tiniest cases.

This is where if CNAME's were being properly handled you wouldn't have a
issue.  Give the service the indirection support and aliasing support.
HTTP uses the alias record for indirection which is just wrong.
 
> Regards,
> John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies
> ",
> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
> _______________________________________________
> dnsext mailing list
> dnsext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka@isc.org