Re: [DNSOP] revisiting outstanding dicusses for 6304bis

joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Tue, 24 February 2015 21:26 UTC

Return-Path: <joelja@bogus.com>
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 084281A892F for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 13:26:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 qI_MCrt3pKiY for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 13:26:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0DA51A891A for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 13:26:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mb-aye.local ([173.247.207.124]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t1OLQ9cH083558 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 24 Feb 2015 21:26:09 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com)
Message-ID: <54ECEC70.7030902@bogus.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 13:26:08 -0800
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/36.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
References: <54A83AFC.4030103@bogus.com> <54EA134D.9020108@bogus.com> <CAHbuEH4t11KvyX-TwW3ZncbA97GEfzvEphaArORsG6hBdZ1ZGg@mail.gmail.com> <F67319C3-66A1-4659-8B12-72F2D5ABBE88@vpnc.org> <CAHbuEH4yRxPZwDNjq8T2bBoPyUp0TaizuftL6HPYfX6eKc92fg@mail.gmail.com> <7232B70E-D9F3-43BD-9DB1-2908A80E9404@bogus.com> <20150224202853.GN1801@mx1.yitter.info>
In-Reply-To: <20150224202853.GN1801@mx1.yitter.info>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Pmv9wRB1VNPgI2gQDsHax5IletVSlxwWT"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/I49gR7uSZK1HqfolqEAf65sDxsg>
Cc: "draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc6304bis@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc6304bis@tools.ietf.org>, Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>, "dnsop-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <dnsop-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] revisiting outstanding dicusses for 6304bis
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: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 21:26:16 -0000

On 2/24/15 12:28 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:06:06PM -0800, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>> Should we consider recommendations with respect to treatment of logging or storage of queries or the extent to which such queries should be protected? 
>>
> 
> IMO, No.  The text as it stands says, "This could result in logs."
> There are lots of operational reasons to log, and the fact that your
> leaking queries could result in information about your system being
> made public is a reason _not to leak_ in the first place.  That has
> nothing to do with operating AS112, which is infrastructure to sink
> traffic that never should have made it to the Net in the first place.

Ok thanks, this echos my assumptions , but I don't consider myself an
arbiter to taste, at least absence of validation.

> Best regards,
> 
> A
> 
>