Re: [DNSOP] Making domains work even when connectivity fails (Was: the root is not special, everybody please stop obsessing over it

william manning <chinese.apricot@gmail.com> Sat, 16 February 2019 18:01 UTC

Return-Path: <chinese.apricot@gmail.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 6F31C130D7A for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 10:01:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 qin47ZQvSbUg for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 10:01:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yw1-xc43.google.com (mail-yw1-xc43.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F347F130F1C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 10:01:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yw1-xc43.google.com with SMTP id n12so4904467ywn.13 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 10:01:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/N6BXzPRGStYMa5BftFQ6tikc46scUDmmBsY1SfXnrk=; b=X6HhGKTs6EG2KkDuwyIMtE37Y6F8iNCGcMX9TknmiztGnbH8F5moOIC37+HSBfmJWs DO0kCvL5YmLdT1jPGEkcLChfjk3W762TFAhTvGID6kNLcVKUkTrFpx1aXSnjD+DOXBhn CSCtOclBbc4J+LAWz3JwcifaZPlgA9WcZ1qVvvKh5L8F/0wOKkW4UsXNEKl91C61xsy5 MX6kwWvqOYeoccCO2i9nc01UWe5vvLxkYKEBiJQXtS60M+tFzwxvAPyEbyo43cklPIP0 ENoPty62jgXVN7nguA7r9m8mqaPl0PeVKiqKCj3p31pPvqn4afFI1SBODV2K1Kf0pvqh pKlA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/N6BXzPRGStYMa5BftFQ6tikc46scUDmmBsY1SfXnrk=; b=ZgBXUvOYDiveGt3DtqLyCQS1Gx+0w4r7i8Iy4tfOY1MEpG9vfKGAPUDYawl5IyTE5d fOinrn9d3x2+b5618O2mo8WpH7jPMH+f0WQ4y4WDTOjKJf+ezSpZZhCmIhrw3XbaaZd7 RR9J3Hf5MWAjeJ4HngAEDpK4+Xb+QSOxvzQf0xDy1aqlw8wg/NAJy+frgahVgsbytKpo hgtQQ3vFfBk9lrZuqcWiEN02OK/WRt7WMdQmr3f6Y98Kd6EbxxXFhbC7TmBthdrhIisx Jt+HCQssqXt4IlxiPgNkfAjy1A7qLv0rqIyajiRNNni6cN3yOqRGNhs+ABTXmddxMELA 2izA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAubR3gkdcsEnUGY2+n0a59mTpaLM5KZlbNxKpzNXQAbxPxLRv0QI m4BOfjct2tWprkK0utEPCH/QGZLpLt3IpMvPMoc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IZdpAc46hnjbKDqUsj3xZ0+UxmPL+AKVtd/l3hijFS4P0o/weBxtn6Iyqv8ypgQUKH0R57EaqYzDo3nl4QueHk=
X-Received: by 2002:a81:5503:: with SMTP id j3mr13107087ywb.355.1550340063912; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 10:01:03 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <b45edb5e-1508-0b02-a14c-a5be4ca9c0e6@redbarn.org> <20190215095936.qnxuucn6oezj7tsx@nic.fr> <CA+nkc8BcuaGC4TKUzY429Hh2=dZk2dA48=P2ecjwvhV466hT4Q@mail.gmail.com> <20190215143446.6vp57cmlsesswnlt@nic.fr> <4efcd843-df84-e279-1df7-c240849edfd3@redbarn.org>
In-Reply-To: <4efcd843-df84-e279-1df7-c240849edfd3@redbarn.org>
From: william manning <chinese.apricot@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2019 10:00:55 -0800
Message-ID: <CACfw2hjX60evQwY+Yf8vtyS0eh9dt9OAys+RR3htM1TnaxGEbQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>, Bob Harold <rharolde@umich.edu>, IETF DNSOP WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ca6684058206acf4"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/9BcBZLuxuyjr1S8B228jI-hl7p8>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Making domains work even when connectivity fails (Was: the root is not special, everybody please stop obsessing over it
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: Sat, 16 Feb 2019 18:01:10 -0000

Multicast NOTIFY?  You mean like RFC 6804, or RFC 7558.  Use of a
subscription model or lease still depends on reachability and when you
don't have that, you have two choices, use a stale lease or abandon it.
Take your pick.

/Wm

On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 8:44 AM Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> wrote:

>
>
> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote on 2019-02-15 06:34:
> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 09:29:29AM -0500,
> >   Bob Harold <rharolde@umich.edu> wrote
> >   a message of 73 lines which said:
> >
> >> I think in most solutions, if the name servers for "
> >> malware-c-and-c-as-a-service.com" and "com" are both unreachable,
> >> the domain should continue to resolve.  But if "com" is reachable,
> >> and says " malware-c-and-c-as-a-service.com" no longer exists, it
> >> should go away.
>
> this is why serve-stale is most wrong. permission, and an agreement to
> hear a trusted NOTIFY later if the authority wants to do the work of
> keeping track of who it told things to, and the work of telling them
> when something has importantly changed (like a glue address change, a
> name server change, a key change, a signature invalidated, or malware
> removed). this is a subscription (leasing) problem, not a caching one.
>
> > Any volunteer to write a problem statement for the "VIX.SU issue"?
> > Short version: "when I'm on the same network that at least one
> > authoritative name server of VIX.SU, I want this domain to work, even
> if there
> > is zero Internet connectivity to the outside world" Longer version:
> > "TODO (think of: is it automatic or not, does it require prior access
> > or not, phantom domains, etc)"
>
> just as root-level is the wrong focus, so is local-level. the reason we
> don't solve this problem with multicast NOTIFY is that the information
> you may need a subscription to (due to potential network partitioning)
> could be in another campus, or another region, or another isp, or
> another country.
>
> --
> P Vixie
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>