IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Draft for dynamic discovery of secure resolvers

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Tue, 21 August 2018 02:58 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 553FB130E02 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 19:58:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 4O3fDrBWV795 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 19:58:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x22d.google.com (mail-io0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22d]) (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 AA0CB130DF6 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 19:58:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id m4-v6so14309075iop.3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 19:58:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=f3x7OIOl1NKGXgtx4yiyOfcQoUxRM9d/PPW5Hi1el6s=; b=BFwJrgtuZYFkhD/Vk7C71aQp2gE6nxvfhyeXLG+YHu/kPeZKcvA9SvW3mVPtkQyfWY Gq5dvQExHoIM7cE7O1HknkV4ZaY8FgDbXlaacbM8Y5Jnor4HfYdWY3KZgWcksFNN97on IIRaTsyH7uBUz4ZVeW6Eyi2FeA3bPaDnVOVxT5GAcny72onsqI7ORG5nL1x+mU35KbhF OkCj86e4T47AUOdfWldZKFudYSXbTurqy0U7lfyJERc25Vkybl4vagJS4wO3AHFHVgZp X2Wq1UROXLM2um7WjEkCzx/SkvgbLYzuyjRFJVK+mu8RezcUkUD5z4dxN2mo5vS4PC/h bcFA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=f3x7OIOl1NKGXgtx4yiyOfcQoUxRM9d/PPW5Hi1el6s=; b=F6MOAJurEjm3rTL1qRYXMJ+FWqeZFYOXANLP3pLyy1ZlozSr6FqmbzRDvoxLC8r7Z0 l3RDKfESTZqLlajF497+UKIlndMNkSG0Sr7RPDnB+TH5t3jPzlGZlXT2+3o6KKDmTV0F C5lcpIfAXOszSzXksGClgUQFLc9w+oifq9ytPwJzdOyMl4COqIRELwnRchM3AGMnUYrY zcf7dkRuO0OMKlpMx2bCDNWXcw1rPMyB8vUHY7b0oTh1/2D0gmvK6jDQv4zvMxULmscT jAqWeUxTjW5wUGOaSI2mlSw3buF8ZPVBMMltWUeIdgkcYjjzLhtv+gW1GgYnve5mvvEH uyTg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFKCZgHI29InQCS4X8rMoedLAp9h3VTCMXG7xP5jPCroLtspDrc B7yMBv6BDJVZKT4Zp7Le1NEBfc514CVU1VMe4vfLKpvQ
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPy2u2YBnkY7zySbyevePwYkzuoxXqB5gkwFsOSggHWARiXb7oZY9mdRiPdihQSCCPA+/BQDzuUsIg4uOGrBiNQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:9d0b:: with SMTP id g11-v6mr42503375ioe.85.1534820305845; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 19:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a4f:a009:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 19:57:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20180821023639.612C8AD6BA8@fafnir.remote.dragon.net>
References: <CAC=TB13mUH2SDxFb4c3rOz0-Z6PE_r9i84_xK=dmLxiVr45+tA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1808201720060.3596@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <23C2BA0B-B4A7-49F2-9FFD-90B90E2928B5@bangj.com> <56B7EA81-A840-4320-BDD0-781E9D999904@vpnc.org> <B5CCB149-BEE2-46D4-BF3C-C32D5BCA3EA3@bangj.com> <20180821014030.C2678AD6354@fafnir.remote.dragon.net> <922DCF48-BA8A-42B8-99BA-2B367D981568@bangj.com> <20180821022627.50A64AD6A31@fafnir.remote.dragon.net> <CAPt1N1np9KdMmqE09AhsvH-macAer2dMxsUUpF4AYVSeB0g-oA@mail.gmail.com> <20180821023639.612C8AD6BA8@fafnir.remote.dragon.net>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2018 22:57:45 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1=dsjjtoCZUJkvkWubzRtv3So7B0uTtZnm621p_m4NQ3g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul Ebersman <ebersman@fafnir.local>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001fdba90573e93372"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/BGm0iGuw-klAlQMNTAn4Zc8Bu9g>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Draft for dynamic discovery of secure resolvers
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Tue, 21 Aug 2018 02:58:28 -0000

We have no privacy expectations from DNS.   We may have privacy
expectations from DoH.

On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 10:36 PM, Paul Ebersman <ebersman@fafnir.local>
wrote:

> mellon> The rest of what you said is nice, but "we have to balance
> mellon> theoretical risk versus sane and widespread deployment" is a
> mellon> statement that sounds a lot better if we do the math.
>
> How is getting my DNS server that uses DOH worse than trusting the same
> DHCP server to give DNS servers that use UDP?
>
> I'm still waiting for a decent answer on that.
>
> If it isn't worse, we're back to "why shouldn't this be done via DHCP"?
>
> I agree that a more secure DHCP would be better. But if we're not going
> to be improving DHCP and most of the world still uses it, then it boils
> down to that question "why is DOH via DHCP worse than just DNS via
> DHCP"?
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email