Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-https-05.txt

Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com> Tue, 11 May 2021 16:08 UTC

Return-Path: <bemasc@google.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 5783E3A1CCE for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 May 2021 09:08:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 yeMkwxZrnZ3Y for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 May 2021 09:08:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x435.google.com (mail-wr1-x435.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::435]) (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 A47393A1CCC for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 May 2021 09:08:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x435.google.com with SMTP id s8so20714622wrw.10 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 May 2021 09:08:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=RhoBKdvIU8ugDClUDC6InRa1rT81MzAbxXha5f7PIpU=; b=qLCaLTdYdjoiqrc9vv3TdhJK9kZx+ev9mlZ9k5ZxzRBGgdPx7wHjyOT36HTuYSQxSy rnUdA5rOb1sISXBUpVQAlSeRbMWsmQzGk9JP37Lc/aDTyJNRMdF43MxD4FtP38mFzu3O rl7WtQWIdZTdvpmyuafiVAB7pV873nIWy5MjzeWLcatbJlYnLgGeluncCLbE0Wpju7zl 0zhRgLvjVkIUXC7z4bbmizWmDiDJKDSO734PIICHYP/TO9xhEj1rT5DKeadszVtPObTb dpxc96bJXHYg/UsjLVY1FXda8aWYw4Egrc9TdpAVB78tba54aeyn074D4DMVf5O4B5vs +2jA==
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=RhoBKdvIU8ugDClUDC6InRa1rT81MzAbxXha5f7PIpU=; b=nxQ6LRnvWwocK/WRBjKzX/U+Yzblj7JndZ1Dzz1ezTtYZu1Z/ogTcX6+L7Ply5P4Pu EAFVNUTVYLFFruAYMjp9HJoM0pxeg6hKTjMGLOW678ABV1BfdYtWQXLTEtpqrcTZTn7N xlspvp0ViY6BsravAKEZYJTmCB7AeKBeqhJncqVAL1UNXcr3qIrchbhGOgb932/shnU4 0MfaFd79uALt4vKtORcCLROWoYkbtRlHZxRTCuNXkklKQLzcRl4GPwiomSNn4iL4mnJs UBDhD7c3nnqyQXjbNFAK+JqxmijuqXMn77LthSgexSImnf9fUq5XHyF6V+ioQanrRZdU KoIQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5336xDBaucAnebumIMDmhH2su0i9Kpr2AYJ/PzhiricqaEN0yAwH hCsHoE/akUOt0eloZ0ww4roxUaaFcAUzmT1vFhEelQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx6FnZfO34sg8Z5lNOFYfrf6bln0pFej2rv6qzLEoFYxsJzbkCsoKHYLScjvTM307ZVIoUbuW5EKls96XPBVeE=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:eec4:: with SMTP id a4mr39505342wrp.159.1620749300256; Tue, 11 May 2021 09:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F4CE48A1-7AB0-45D0-97FF-158CE3A04EE1@icann.org> <3EE971EE-0777-44D6-9CD2-771B92FFE938@hopcount.ca> <1d822219-8ab9-2cb7-d0a4-9b8afc39058d@powerdns.com> <2952D408-117B-40D0-B859-7A8E4111629E@hopcount.ca> <CAHbrMsD+uiaYQ8i58VRjF=3AtW9uAoAtgbKzNzrPZC3QCmD2pQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAH1iCirykCpqkQEizYUBYMJEXMYRGkWvnzyo-jP=XOT-4fP-EA@mail.gmail.com> <123fd984-a3e1-0d09-b745-9a7ed6260759@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <123fd984-a3e1-0d09-b745-9a7ed6260759@nic.cz>
From: Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 09:08:08 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHbrMsCrf8GS3N=HF53X-M0oq09yw_vKGFLU_qA6wt94-+vNXg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "libor.peltan" <libor.peltan@nic.cz>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="0000000000005622c705c2101abd"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/Dmsm39WTCYU7WtQggf52rdNYxLg>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-https-05.txt
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: Tue, 11 May 2021 16:08:28 -0000

On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 3:31 AM libor.peltan <libor.peltan@nic.cz> wrote:

> If there really is a strong reason for putting multiple key-value records
> into one RData (instead of one RRSet), it should be described somewhere
> clearly
>
OK, I've proposed text documenting the reasoning here:
https://github.com/MikeBishop/dns-alt-svc/pull/323/files.

The proposed text is:

Storing a key-value map within a single RR, rather than placing each
key-value
pair in a separate RR, provides the following advantages:

* It enables a familiar key=value zone file syntax that matches zone
authors'
  experience with command-line arguments and other typical key-value
mappings.
* It avoids requiring zone file authors to manage inter-pair binding IDs.
* It makes each record independently meaningful, consistent with the usual
  convention for DNS records (c.f. SRV, MX, AAAA, etc.).
* It saves at least 11 bytes of overhead per parameter by avoiding
repetition of
  the name, type, class, TTL, and inter-pair binding ID.
* It provides a wire format whose structural nesting matches the logical
scope
  of each key=value pair, and avoids requiring cross-RR reconstruction of
  bindings by the client.