Re: [DNSOP] Second Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-extended-error

Eric Orth <ericorth@google.com> Thu, 24 October 2019 17:24 UTC

Return-Path: <ericorth@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 81CAB120113 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 10:24:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.499 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, 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 iTUmAGhahpaD for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 10:24:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com (mail-wm1-x336.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::336]) (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 963EE12004D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 10:24:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id q130so3215305wme.2 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 10:24:36 -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; bh=/HfyXMGzNSnB/NE5bQjgegPACwVwctkyaleDgkv5+fc=; b=XmdBBWSRvXuM3KLMMVOZSLun+EJtH6Q0ON4ANl3iBNh//pcZb2R+AIufjrZv04Lp8P WQWN+OtWXMS6hCAJt5EHtQ1edXkawrx2UwP8ktaNbFvHVZAm2QSjlO2s6jYdeHItDguP HUqAAqCv57TzaXpYun9DIYWdcJQlarNuk3SkmrQ9lIKtBY6PpCVA6BWcCR36CTYg+xG5 YR7TUzEmIr8LDFefc0iYpS17amYK0L/JwHjrGFZ76bGS4Sc0QC2xdfSW19wQgzX5P+p0 9YwtHREmHva0IMYgBCegYeevgXElZb+JQmpy9HTArzT+Jwy9MrpWQxSGZ7b8qr21lRBv VZYA==
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; bh=/HfyXMGzNSnB/NE5bQjgegPACwVwctkyaleDgkv5+fc=; b=a1PYoSV6+xKjcwbIE5y5LBt7JqB9QdzeuBLi6tk6GeBOqJSROWA351Y5QuLcPAKyfc gmu0Rz8CUZ583INUJjgow41/zzUo/lkeKfJa/l5uu5/EuhqK34gsowe34Xk5Gj7st0Ny xGsfxeKpIHHfOFYfVAuP9Z7tPb/+eVEWBBvAYkGU4S+mh571WJ9yxMeUqULSKoJboAO/ xWEXRAp/kX+7UjrSSG/rOCNN3a9rnKQuOSl8Ldg/MJhpiIaXL3Y8dv3Hi3dkR9GQL89f 5P1q8iYx+4/acb3MrE7Q8s8/sjA0Ikj0wl7xeJOqL9Yreo4llAK2pblzR5fFD8KvG0GN rxuA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWbKG8FllCR9qUtsspdn5ulODPLUjUAWwwUuPpWqCDEgx6akYG4 bgC49HWM7jzlITtaz7Xhs/4k4pcAXQQgreY75VsCxkenMJg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw/URj4mTPogLDmd00BgtnKGjGMLfG1aUsJl7qBBm1kjWlXq0gGmnB9x+O3jlrbCiZqtHF/yMINx6fkPuA4VCk=
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:9e07:: with SMTP id h7mr6072109wme.96.1571937874508; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 10:24:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CADyWQ+FG7qzPnLkUH7mSBca=1NfXy6YduHD4UdmcfXFjD8xC6g@mail.gmail.com> <20190917075620.avbllsx6kwbiof2z@nic.fr> <yblh84xz4qg.fsf@w7.hardakers.net> <1515406254.3112.1569654220499@appsuite-gw2.open-xchange.com> <ybl8sq54hoh.fsf@w7.hardakers.net> <CADyWQ+F34gNLBdejDSicxZiweRJ367i-KdWtxhW6bx2jvZidNQ@mail.gmail.com> <bd6d286d-0bec-9b00-f819-231d7c0550db@nic.cz> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1910221143230.8949@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1910221143230.8949@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
From: Eric Orth <ericorth@google.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 13:24:22 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMOjQcHyRptKpd-QMmwAMtjtCfHjReOKH4mV=BG01UPmqctCPQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009eda040595ab4e44"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/J-xtvWVGHeP0seCkxVFrrfdulyE>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Second Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-extended-error
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: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 17:24:38 -0000

On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 6:49 AM Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> wrote:

> I expect almost no-one can do anything with EDE without
> getaddrinfo() EAI_ return code extensions.
>

In many cases, especially when DoH is in use, Chrome uses its own built-in
stub resolver.  So EDE is certainly a reasonable option for us without any
changes to getaddrinfo().

On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 1:48 PM Petr Špaček <petr.spacek@nic.cz> wrote:

> 2. Second problem is that it is uncelar if there is going to be a
> consumer: Did *anyone* from stub resolvers said a word about this draft? Is
> it useful as it is? Is there an experimental implementation in stub to
> consume this information?
> dnsop has history of tweaks which never get used by stubs, and this draft
> in particular is very expensive to implement in resolver code.


Chrome DNS has no specific plans decided for EDE yet.  But we do think it's
generally a good idea and are looking forward to it.  I don't have any
implementation-ability concerns with the current draft.