Re: [DNSOP] Question about usage of and

"Paul Hoffman" <> Tue, 13 March 2018 00:07 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77D971250B8 for <>; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 17:07:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uc2L6To0ONQw for <>; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 17:07:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (Opus1.Proper.COM []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31D9E124F57 for <>; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 17:07:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w2D06kHv087072 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 12 Mar 2018 17:06:47 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from
X-Authentication-Warning: Host [] claimed to be []
From: "Paul Hoffman" <>
To: "Jim Reid" <>
Cc: "dnsop WG" <>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 17:07:16 -0700
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.10r5443)
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Question about usage of and
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 00:07:21 -0000

On 12 Mar 2018, at 16:41, Jim Reid wrote:

>> On 12 Mar 2018, at 23:27, Paul Hoffman <> wrote:
>> For which other protocols did you want certificates with IP addresses 
>> as identifiers?
> I think these may be needed for SIP, particularly roving (nameless) 
> clients. And quite possibly for P2P applications.

How could you use ACME to validate the IP address of a roving client or 
a P2P application that has no fixed IP address?

Having said that:

On 12 Mar 2018, at 16:43, Paul Vixie wrote:

> we need to use TLS to secure both dns-over-https and some forms of 
> TCP/53 in
> which the server's address is known but not its name.

This seems like a reasonable use case.

>> If your list is longer than zero, are you willing to help Roland with 
>> a solution using DNS records for validation that has any chance of 
>> being usable?
> Yes, I’d be willing to work with Roland on at least finding and 
> documenting likely use cases. Are you? Whether we (or others) can then 
> come up with something that has any chance of being usable is another 
> matter.

Exactly. Given the difficulty of getting stable and records at all, being able to write a TXT record into them 
seems completely unstable. Thus, "temporarily put up a web server where 
you were going to put up the DNS (or other) server" seems the most 
likely to work reliably. If you have other ideas, that's great.

--Paul Hoffman