Re: [DNSOP] my dnse vision (A+E vs E)

Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr> Wed, 05 March 2014 17:30 UTC

Return-Path: <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr>
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 40B6C1A0119 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 09:30:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 1Wa4BnUYzbTy for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 09:30:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from givry.fdupont.fr (givry.fdupont.fr [IPv6:2001:41d0:1:6d55:211:5bff:fe98:d51e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F206A1A00F5 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 09:30:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from givry.fdupont.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by givry.fdupont.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id s25HUfBV094232 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 18:30:42 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from dupont@givry.fdupont.fr)
Message-Id: <201403051730.s25HUfBV094232@givry.fdupont.fr>
From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2014 18:30:41 +0100
Sender: Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/DhKzTCFXGzVEB5Rg6iRBPFpWk08
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] my dnse vision (A+E vs E)
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 05 Mar 2014 17:30:47 -0000

Another note about builtin/inline encryption solutions: there is a
trade-off between encryption + authentication/integrity as recommended
by crypto design rules vs. performances and message sizes.  Of course
this will be addressed during the crypto design, so when/after we
reach a consensus about what we need in DNS encryption (i.e.,
message size overhead SHOULD be small). BTW it (the overhead) will
be likely bigger in the query than in the response so we should not
get new amplification concerns.

Regards

Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr