Re: [DNSOP] revisiting outstanding dicusses for 6304bis

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Tue, 24 February 2015 20:28 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.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 193E31A88BC for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 12:28:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.141
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.141 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_INFO=1.448, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311] autolearn=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 U4Z7vDCU4fNU for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 12:28:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (ow5p.x.rootbsd.net [208.79.81.114]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB1DD1A88B8 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 12:28:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (unknown [50.189.173.0]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 215A68A035; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 20:28:55 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 15:28:53 -0500
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
Message-ID: <20150224202853.GN1801@mx1.yitter.info>
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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <7232B70E-D9F3-43BD-9DB1-2908A80E9404@bogus.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/JWx68cKgIimzLgww_XMPQZ8hKU4>
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 20:28:58 -0000

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.

Best regards,

A


-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com