Re: [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-00.txt

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 11 December 2015 17:43 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0B0A1B2DB8 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 09:43:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.137
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.137 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lmdybGRewFph for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 09:43:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A31391A904F for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 09:43:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 76462 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2015 17:43:20 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=12aad.566b0b38.k1512; bh=oFPjLmsjVGx8VMzuwdbr54glpJjhc8f8tfLlSKEASaM=; b=eSme8cSEvFcnCM/IF2ZhWWuc8VQOHEoOFb/vOJvvY70vHZ5bALll5V6tNCGi0k0bgsuU2mQn6MPXWECXJ1xXqQ5DSiQqkVIdjfYhOdwgNDIT+3gHg7fB1JORcAaYBr3JsrhmWfF/xZVveKWwkv9nzXGIrnl9j4vfdsEdPweYu/CxjcAj+l/wvPJio70pUNMLx1V1/ls5qGMh7GHkvj1AAd2x6wU3LF9EPGI5NGKAzC4/I+O1qwqIOZoIXsJgdHEZ
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=12aad.566b0b38.k1512; bh=oFPjLmsjVGx8VMzuwdbr54glpJjhc8f8tfLlSKEASaM=; b=EhRHoad6488ePKYbhx5cVJttheT1xxXOMyTm1DUr68KN2lPsSf4PqR2v0kZkJZBkiVYFgPz8SfN5X/Pr6CbKnPzZG+Qx3/L2R1CgFrQJINSpzansvuRRu+B1m/atV6HkgLdn9e0kOMaagRvH6CDTSZ8gv0qdTPSOR4f1ajjN9kpanectQ+2ENH1wHLl1xSRvWogbfzKN8nOoJX0YfkUSZpTgVf204Btb2o0kc1nWW3VcbKCTCM7UweQznUYi+BAy
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.0/X.509/SHA1) via TCP6; 11 Dec 2015 17:43:19 -0000
Date: 11 Dec 2015 12:43:19 -0500
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.11.1512111127450.47143@ary.lan>
From: "John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: "Edward Lewis" <edward.lewis@icann.org>
In-Reply-To: <D28F49CE.11F44%edward.lewis@icann.org>
References: <EB6AB6D0-8808-49C2-90DE-F4E6E146BDE8@frobbit.se> <20151205034455.41869.qmail@ary.lan> <D28F49CE.11F44%edward.lewis@icann.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (OSX 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/4wCzf9579QlO9Iipjp5DoHIMFK8>
Cc: "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 17:43:23 -0000

> There's talk about protocol switches.  I think that's a misnomer.  There
> are resolution switches.  I see a lot of utility in it being the top-level
> name in a Domain Name.  (I'm not ready to say that's the best way to go.)

Until .onion, the protocol switch for all of the special names was at the 
point where you map a name into an IP address, since localhost and .local 
give you a real IP that you use the same way as any other IP.  You can 
open a TCP socket for web or submit, you can send UDP packets for DNS, you 
can send ICMP packets for ping.  For .test, .example. and .invalid. the 
mapping always fails.

Now .onion comes along and the switch is at a different layer, at whatever 
level SOCKS is.  You can open TCP-like virtual circuits, you might be able 
to do DNS if your SOCKS driver simulates UDP, you can't do ping ping, 
since SOCKS doesn't simulate ICMP.

.onion is a special case for a variety of reasons, but it's not clear to 
me whether people think that slicing at the SOCKS level rather than the 
address resolution level is an exception, or we will be defining a new 
application API for every new special name.

R's,
John