Re: [DNSOP] Minimum viable ANAME

Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk> Tue, 06 November 2018 09:19 UTC

Return-Path: <ray@bellis.me.uk>
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 BE1A212D4F1 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 01:19:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 W2peIrUgKLQI for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 01:19:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hydrogen.portfast.net (hydrogen.portfast.net [188.246.200.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EDE11277C8 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 01:19:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-9701.meeting.ietf.org ([31.133.151.1]:63054) by hydrogen.portfast.net ([188.246.200.2]:465) with esmtpsa (fixed_plain:ray@bellis.me.uk) (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) id 1gJxWM-0004a9-3h (Exim 4.72) for dnsop@ietf.org (return-path <ray@bellis.me.uk>); Tue, 06 Nov 2018 09:19:38 +0000
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <20180919201401.8E0C220051382A@ary.qy> <08C8A740-D09B-4577-AF2A-79225EDB526B@dotat.at> <20180920061343.GA754@jurassic> <E944887D-51ED-41A0-AC5A-3076743620D8@isoc.org> <acef1f69-8e4f-52cc-dca5-3ada9446e0ee@bellis.me.uk> <683ea769-094a-4f06-5a43-d5cb557f285a@pletterpet.nl>
From: Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>
Message-ID: <75d28a7a-826c-6ae4-8df0-7813035d04a0@bellis.me.uk>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 16:19:36 +0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <683ea769-094a-4f06-5a43-d5cb557f285a@pletterpet.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/L44BY43tI1m1OBRSm89fUwmfO6M>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Minimum viable ANAME
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: Tue, 06 Nov 2018 09:19:43 -0000


On 06/11/2018 16:15, Matthijs Mekking wrote:
> As nice and clean the HTTP record draft is, without specifying how to do 
> expansion of the record into address records it is not going to solve 
> the CNAME-at-the-apex problem that DNS providers have, and we will stick 
> with the proprietary solutions (this may solve a different use case 
> though).

They're supposed to be expanded either in the client, or in the 
recursive resolver, as described in the draft.

If we're misunderstanding each other, please let me know!

Ray