Re: [DNSOP] Introducing draft-vavrusa-dnsop-aaaa-for-free

Ólafur Guðmundsson <olafur@cloudflare.com> Sat, 26 March 2016 19:59 UTC

Return-Path: <olafur@cloudflare.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 92DE412D1AC for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 12:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cloudflare.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 apf11Ot7yYyu for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 12:59:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22c.google.com (mail-oi0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22c]) (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 D3D2A12D10B for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 12:59:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id d205so129582575oia.0 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 12:59:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cloudflare.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=NYU7Cdq15Vki/mHivn72YSmUQiWFYdh0+rdqeJ0t6lU=; b=kxmPZ7e7N9Yp9aYrLl3xnss6g2n6gjSAN/3CmY+nxhp6zlnj1z3HlCWb8dzLMcaXaL DEpTUA0qQPXN9zwTGajpmHiBAo9kxPjkO7VNUWg5/P78C1LjkkEX3N62PuI48DJOAn/T inUMa9fpl8Bov4yxQ1hJGYWr2PuNNq1HOA3PU=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=NYU7Cdq15Vki/mHivn72YSmUQiWFYdh0+rdqeJ0t6lU=; b=i6mjBAmHY6Wrt+WuNdRMtjlirPo1wv2kUrlwjTjBjmyEbwWh3k8+n2K5PeWHemvZ1A y0/TmZbNtdwHOXFF1CO2lY1rtR4K3g1ojKzogsdAoBloIwnjP+3p8ybX4ur1oEAobHkV mKUp1ahqSsKqmE/VGgs5jMcg4CuvpbgoN89S9RKNdV/d3D8Lb+ONZuoxU//nw2uqLuiW u8a+nDIad6hg9YXdie52iDS9QgDaTujVc1gUchPent9yU/Um7VXMRMVyiStKB7yp+ypp YUeCJS6UQV20UTc6/fzwv+T+12Kri0Rl1uTKG4My+Pobe2kjzp5oJpprgZ/fJwZO0Qg0 dLvg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJLFDMVIOmajbc2uksDmYtdUvVkE9ur5c8g9sr0bzYqmLDsGy/1ASvD8w1dREC9WeLBGTZG7C6yodzliv612
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.74.132 with SMTP id x126mr1937310oia.45.1459022379245; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 12:59:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.157.2.67 with HTTP; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 12:59:39 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20160326025121.14477.qmail@ary.lan>
References: <20160325230119.GA5239@mx2.yitter.info> <20160326025121.14477.qmail@ary.lan>
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2016 15:59:39 -0400
Message-ID: <CAN6NTqzHOqp5QF1CO1Mt+O=U_iHTkWu2G0jQ3-inFhG-oc6khQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ólafur Guðmundsson <olafur@cloudflare.com>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113dc710a27e69052ef91e17"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/LekOSbfwCNmIJx4Y2r8iTzolkq8>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Introducing draft-vavrusa-dnsop-aaaa-for-free
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Sat, 26 Mar 2016 19:59:41 -0000

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 10:51 PM, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

> >As I think many here know, I am not of the get-off-my-lawn persuasion
> >for DNS innovations.  I don't think it's a bad idea in principle.  I'm
> >just aware that we have this long history, and that history was based
> >on a certain kind of conservatism that is arguably appropriate to a
> >technology quite as fundamental to the Internet functioning as the DNS
> >is.  If we're going to abandon that conservatism, I think it needs
> >quite a lot more early IETF buy-in than we might get by developing
> >this work here in DNSOP.  The more signal we can get to suggest that
> >DNS actors are ok with the innovation, the lower I think that bar gets.
>
> I'd be a lot more comfortable if we had some field test data about
> what real DNS caches do with the extra AAAA records.  In theory
> nothing bad should happen, in practice ...
>
> John
The next step is experimentation, we wanted to see if the community thought
this was a stupid idea before going forward.
There are 3 possible outcomes when a DNS querier gets an aswer like this
#1 It accepts everything from authority section
#2 It tosses the non queried RRset
#3 it Rejects the answer and tries again

If the result is #1 nothing needs to be done
For #2 that means convincing the software vendors to adopt more relaxed
approach
On the other hand if #3 is the case for a significant part of the
infrastructure we can not do this w/o signaling


Olafur