Re: [DNSOP] WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-let-localhost-be-localhost-02

神明達哉 <> Thu, 25 January 2018 18:36 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7102F12E05C for <>; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 10:36:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.399
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iemlM4Gk8vz9 for <>; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 10:36:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DB9F127333 for <>; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 10:36:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id b21so16704651wme.4 for <>; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 10:36:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=OalNDrGDV9A+wv0wbIVEZ89QfvHjMFqKtXTPP3kBNZQ=; b=YfXdFJx4f5jaB32J9kAhjHcSa7chvS8qg6cctNklQNRekGXEncyaX99UW7yass7Rn8 CuPnk0G4/ORqJK86iUBymz2SfXfm27qlK6y+ele87Yn7pgVA91Pbmvf/u8wqZkWB6A+m 6o1QHhvvTMrNBnCfvpywayZlAgsXpAmS2TpA7zLQ0aMAW/0mMv/cVz1D7MOdcUKLWoKA zcOmLi7smWWZjGdypFoSy/WGJKT/rigHxvI5JWTyRY10AjYtmkxiiVHWfj+GoxvmijTQ dZR6Nv68vVWPYRw+fXcXZ7w05yk7dTbD1BQ+aeD2IgAtFxW5Bvf8teBuWQMq/myg62h0 XAPA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=OalNDrGDV9A+wv0wbIVEZ89QfvHjMFqKtXTPP3kBNZQ=; b=O4eLCgFxkOJrGbwJKwVvmOcxW4Pi8M/opO/n4bDZaipl11KpMd6Opqx4STw9X67Ugt Re1nh/xYHNn4AGPSjZqYphlafqa7w/cmO9GcQNiESAouq56n34IjN6HsFzPCUrAi2tNp y/inxrAlSXiTork/1+VlmrgerAl5t2eHf5NE4KuY7e5x80+fQ1Kq4h2xxj79O8LCXxfr FrvHR7XhmPuRSoXMBA1Ul8AfdQz4Sufa/K8kJlClaR8OlKMpvC1rWHjDNO4ciLBYFGkV uDe8d4RKPbqJ4Dc41+7ZmasKwLa8PFpAi5n8ypD6vQFXok+QZlQfUnl1bI6gyooxQRXD 4dxg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytdVgoWD42AsVjsoMIW/QkDQIJWNA0h+cQxBrIM/Uf6qgNojWdXL 3pe37KNAx1pHMwPuPg1qvdMGltCmBefzTV5wv2p3nOAa
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x2248wfdBmdli46AlMvqhgK6/khmkrGOXWKSislY9jq7cK/11f2r5vU3uYnrS6Qv7P7JA0h2Xnj3LLnb8TsbVbUQ=
X-Received: by with SMTP id e124mr8904277wme.153.1516905405799; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 10:36:45 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 10:36:45 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <>
From: 神明達哉 <>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 10:36:45 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: vgudy2cJqd-zQjUh5IZ6hEf2-bY
Message-ID: <>
To: Tony Finch <>
Cc: dnsop <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-let-localhost-be-localhost-02
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 18:36:49 -0000

At Thu, 25 Jan 2018 16:03:08 +0000,
Tony Finch <> wrote:

> > I am not nearly so enthusiastic about an important component of
> > the draft.  Specifically, I'd like to suggest that while the
> > requirement for recursive resolvers to return NXDOMAIN for "localhost."
> > is well-intentioned, it will prove counter-productive to the
> > motivating goals of this draft.
> This is a legitimate worry, but it's based on incorrect information.
> Stub resolvers already sink localhost queries themselves - they don't rely
> on their recursive servers.

Could you be more specific about it?  It may be a minority
implementation, but I thought traditional stub resolver
implementations in BSD variants systems (getaddrinfo/gethostbyname
with the backend of libresolv) didn't hardocde special logic for
"localhost." yet.  It's true that such implementations refer to
/etc/hosts and it has system-installed mapping between 'localhost.'
and ::1 by default.  Do you mean (in addition to hardcoding the
special logic) this kind of combination of generic implementation with
default system configuration?  I'm asking this because I think the
difference between this and hardcoded implementation can matter in the
context of this draft.

JINMEI, Tatuya