Re: [DNSOP] meta issue: WG to discuss DNS innovation (was Re: draft-hzhwm-start-tls-for-dns-00)

Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Wed, 19 February 2014 00:09 UTC

Return-Path: <marka@isc.org>
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 57FE11A0106 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 16:09:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 8Q0URFaF98Z5 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 16:09:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ams1.isc.org (mx.ams1.isc.org [199.6.1.65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 755961A020D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 16:09:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org (zmx1.isc.org [149.20.0.20]) by mx.ams1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05CBE2383B6 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 00:09:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FFB416005C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 00:09:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from rock.dv.isc.org (c211-30-183-50.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [211.30.183.50]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0E142160035 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 00:09:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from rock.dv.isc.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rock.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2828AF9FC34 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 11:08:57 +1100 (EST)
To: dnsop@ietf.org
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
References: <CAESS1RPh+UK+r=JzZ9nE_DUqcvNtZiS6TNt1CDN-C0uiU7HP=A@mail.gmail.com> <52FEF407.30405@redbarn.org> <20140215140133.GA6990@sources.org> <alpine.LFD.2.10.1402151449280.23619@bofh.nohats.ca> <D82F49E8-9A06-4F52-8E3E-DF5C8D0B7549@virtualized.org> <53006595.5010207@frobbit.se> <6.2.5.6.2.20140218074550.0c380cc8@resistor.net> <5B5AE40C-6D26-419C-A16A-392AF2C33446@hopcount.ca> <20140218221948.D7541F9EB9C@rock.dv.isc.org> <20140218234946.10461.qmail@f5-external.bushwire.net>
Mail-Followup-To: dnsop@ietf.org
In-reply-to: Your message of "18 Feb 2014 23:49:46 -0000." <20140218234946.10461.qmail@f5-external.bushwire.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 11:08:57 +1100
Message-Id: <20140219000857.2828AF9FC34@rock.dv.isc.org>
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/MSamdJEx7OFwLzCxfMEksehbBrE
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] meta issue: WG to discuss DNS innovation (was Re: draft-hzhwm-start-tls-for-dns-00)
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: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 00:09:08 -0000

In message <20140218234946.10461.qmail@f5-external.bushwire.net>;, "Mark Delany"
 writes:
> On 19Feb14, Mark Andrews allegedly wrote:
> > The process for getting a new type hasn't been *hard* for a decade
> > now.
> > 
> > Nameserver developers have been deploying new types quickly for
> > over a decade now.
> > 
> > Recursive servers have had the bugs w.r.t. handling unknown types
> > removed over a decade ago.
> 
> Apart from the web-panels I'd say that the biggest bugbear is CPE such
> as DSL/cable modems. Having conducted some experiments recently, my
> observation is that some of these** have pretty atrocious cache/proxy
> implementations. I had to drop the idea of using PTR for a particular
> application because one implementation of dnsproxy assumes that PTR is
> only ever valid in in-addr.arpa space (it had plenty of other bugs
> too, but that's another story).
> 
> I see now that some newer CPE defaults to 8.8.8.8 - at least that
> eliminates the local implementation bugs...

And I would have gone ahead and implemented it as Autralian Consumer
Law requires a product to be fit for purpose and this modem clearly
wasn't.  The retailer need to refund or replace at the consumers
discression.  Once these !#!@$ boxes get sent back there will be
supply chain presure to fix the problems.

> Mark.
> 
> ** The irony won't be lost on you, Mark, that your neighbours are
>    probably running with that bug since I found it in a popular DSL
>    modem sold in Australia/SE Asia.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka@isc.org