IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Any website publishers who use CDNs on the list?

Patrick Mevzek <mevzek@uniregistry.com> Wed, 07 November 2018 15:47 UTC

Return-Path: <mevzek@uniregistry.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E3BB130DC3 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 07:47:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=uniregistry.com
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 TLrtmjF_YyWS for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 07:47:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from a.mx.uniregistry.net (a.mx.uniregistry.net [64.96.177.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC6D1130DD1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 07:47:38 -0800 (PST)
Abuse: Forward to abuse@uniregistry.com with full headers
X-Virus-Scanned: Content filter at a.mx.uniregistry.net
Powered-By: https://www.uniregistry.com
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=uniregistry.com; s=bravo; t=1541605657; bh=frWuqW6aUVpc5zEfcfGyFV3e/lgZ4MBcs1KFK+yFozo=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=oD1jxPwy0cCTMzayw4DeEVswgg8iSPnaLLFSQHdk8Fy+r6bPg2h20Odsyp2vqsRSO JubcTriCZjWNx8YvhWeRGlEOSBd48iTT+w2W6kL73nk4oYjABDG60JQ8qNEd+drVLo 45GY9xJcadrH8K56jyrk2IbXjKwSujt4bGY5LXuG+v/paw0FPtfFOwulWMwdrtP5mo 6DH5j+NkiSZmo8SsOxulIFUmBi555laTKD6Trjz8+WxjoAKX2lgL/GsPsslMpza8l8 ytykNNp9gz5HfiSVsnTl/5IeYaHKY92F7EYgRL5v9n0DlC9XRf26PxrhWUg18Y5oXo L5ysrh0MK3rJg==
Received: from PatrickM-Laptop.local ([66.54.123.66]) (authenticated bits=0) by a.mx.uniregistry.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-8) with ESMTPSA id wA7FlZIV026150 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 7 Nov 2018 15:47:36 GMT
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <CCEEBCEF-FE91-49A6-96FE-122A5E025159@isoc.org> <20181102121108.GE12840@besserwisser.org> <20181102211625.GB20885@besserwisser.org> <20181102214114.GA92689@isc.org> <5eb5e946-88e7-59f2-1a7d-1eec3e606b9b@nic.cz>
From: Patrick Mevzek <mevzek@uniregistry.com>
Organization: Uniregistry
Message-ID: <0fa05285-0a85-686f-eee3-77ec3a7a8819@uniregistry.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2018 10:47:34 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5eb5e946-88e7-59f2-1a7d-1eec3e606b9b@nic.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/6zK_QYNbBcD2QkAqrln_9x0TrXA>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Any website publishers who use CDNs on the list?
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 07 Nov 2018 15:47:40 -0000



On 2018-11-05 06:10 -0500, Vladimír Čunát wrote:
> On 11/2/18 10:41 PM, Evan Hunt wrote:
>> Speaking as a co-author of ANAME, I agree about this. URI, SRV, a proposed
>> new HTTP RRtype, whatever - service lookup is absolutely the correct way to
>> accomplish this goal.
>>
>> However, browser vendors are *not doing that*, and I've given up hope that
>> they ever will. Trying to out-stubborn them has been ineffective.
> 
> Yes, but I can understand that they're not too inclined - I believe it's
> not easy to portably get information about such RRTYPEs from the OS
> resolver, e.g. I can't see a way in POSIX.

It seems there is a clear movement from many browsers to use DOH now for 
DNS matters.

At which point they are able to get all DNS data in its full glory 
without any kind of OS or underlying libraries limitations, and hence 
could use SRV records like any other clients are doing for other protocols.
-- 
Patrick Mevzek

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email