IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] More work for DNSOP :-)

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Fri, 06 March 2015 21:11 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 AE6A71A86F4 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 13:11:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 jlOAMqQKpWvl for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 13:11:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D70931A86F0 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 13:11:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3kzM7C0s6XzC2j; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 22:11:03 +0100 (CET)
Authentication-Results: mx.nohats.ca; dkim=pass reason="1024-bit key; unprotected key" header.d=nohats.ca header.i=@nohats.ca header.b=Q7cjqO5p; dkim-adsp=pass
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id toZwtUFnM2Zl; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 22:11:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (206-248-139-105.dsl.teksavvy.com [206.248.139.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 22:11:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC21280416; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 16:11:00 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1425676260; bh=vSGVDwnEHBPoZZ4HmEweVFLmAvHzSqknKUPxPp+Oqis=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=Q7cjqO5paEJq8kFsUCS2PEMZWwQa+fy8b66iOTxZQBtj+qFOoHttVFo6rfnM6b6C3 YZAhvT2REJknX7x2zg6SMxnJtbrn9ubsbCkxlhj15XUSvrPds0ChkYQCQtQpXQv2F3 5yloI0gtgqmMhj8FyLmeSYcUgqNPnrY7kqqTW9Bg=
Received: from localhost (paul@localhost) by bofh.nohats.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) with ESMTP id t26LB0CQ023230; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 16:11:00 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: bofh.nohats.ca: paul owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 16:10:59 -0500
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Evan Hunt <each@isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20150306205920.GA17567@isc.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.10.1503061609090.17414@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <20150306145217.GA8959@nic.fr> <54F9C29E.9040408@jive.com> <54F9F90D.1020806@redbarn.org> <54F9FCD3.7010204@jive.com> <54F9FDFA.2030405@redbarn.org> <F25411A6-2CBD-4A76-949C-6E236FA87863@isoc.org> <20150306205920.GA17567@isc.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.10 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/DmyN9Q61WFECZOpAWDocy3RA9R8>
Cc: "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] More work for DNSOP :-)
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: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 21:11:09 -0000

On Fri, 6 Mar 2015, Evan Hunt wrote:

> (As an aside: I've often wondered why the DNS doesn't have *more* meta-query
> types, less extensive than ANY, such as a single type covering A and AAAA.
> Or, an EDNS OPT mechanism to request a list of desired types in addition to
> QTYPE to be returned in the additional section (subject to packet size, rate
> limiting, DNS cookie authentication, whatever).

It's been tried, for instance to get a lot of crypto records along with
the address records. People don't seem to like it at all. It might be
harder now too when needing to include a bunch of NSEC(3) proofs.

Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email