IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any-04.txt

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Mon, 13 February 2017 16:46 UTC

Return-Path: <dot@dotat.at>
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 C3BBC1295A5 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:46:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.22
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 yn94QR0cguTB for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:46:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ppsw-33.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-33.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.133]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E5391295AE for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:46:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://help.uis.cam.ac.uk/email-scanner-virus
Received: from grey.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.57.57]:33145) by ppsw-33.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.137]:25) with esmtps (TLSv1:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) id 1cdJlL-000Irn-ga (Exim 4.88) (return-path <dot@dotat.at>); Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:46:03 +0000
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:46:03 +0000
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
To: Richard Gibson <rgibson@dyn.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC94RYbSkp2h_jOBgmrP3oZouSigPp9xPVxoKxkYft55qMyiZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1702131642360.23062@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <148661979638.4286.4234665114055399732.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAC94RYZM+KMS2c3CVx=8Q005XYGQqNRv--23H7_aTpuY05tEMQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAN6NTqy9_jKXT4Fc9KhmcW7Fq6DTiU2HmzBoWn+YA1fALOh5zA@mail.gmail.com> <CAC94RYYhV0ye252bLNSGPmqQhdZ772AkaJ7us86X1j4nppsWDg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1702131258580.23062@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <CAC94RYbSkp2h_jOBgmrP3oZouSigPp9xPVxoKxkYft55qMyiZQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/GGP2yi1M8Yi979ZmovUUUfVDgZo>
Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=93lafur_Gu=C3=B0mundsson?= <olafur@cloudflare.com>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any-04.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:46:05 -0000

Richard Gibson <rgibson@dyn.com> wrote:
>
> The pitfall comes from unexamined muscle-memory assumptions when inspecting
> a DNS response, so none of those methods avoid it. They're expecting people
> to remember that longstanding behavior has changed without providing any
> clue about it.

OK. But does an EDNS flag help? What if you are using old tools?

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/  -  I xn--zr8h punycode
Hebrides, Bailey: Southeasterly 5 to 7, occasionally gale 8 in south. Rough,
becoming very rough for a time in south. Fair. Good.

v2.8.10 | Report a Bug | By Email