Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-08.txt

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Fri, 17 November 2023 10:41 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 392E1C151534 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 02:41:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.405
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.405 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BQ6plkk8N5PO for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 02:41:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96BFBC151066 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 02:41:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4SWtjl4Ft7zCK3; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 11:41:15 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1700217675; bh=GOPviLzAtR6+kEYsy0Swq27iGCjEobyL5RrHEhlnHyM=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=rlto0SppPPMROv32XnLmMqDNAt/AulUkemtJXazAjBB45YHR3zZ+TvW3JGuU7WPhx JOtdWyt8hkosnPnGXOQ7yd1hW3ziABK+hqxKvnQRuum+2DyJpLe6IbyC1yUVgO2jV1 9XoNHyYyiqYjZIMq131cFH3FEoeun/OraJHXyTXo=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CLzbVU7VHPFK; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 11:41:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [193.110.157.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 11:41:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 682D610BFD94; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 05:41:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6520C10BFD93; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 05:41:13 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 05:41:13 -0500
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>
cc: dnsop@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <6c35913b-e938-4b0f-88da-0c07151d2735@bellis.me.uk>
Message-ID: <3c36d4ae-2a78-f033-4b4b-207e2ca91364@nohats.ca>
References: <169996260219.33611.6405129886775920165@ietfa.amsl.com> <5c529b73-07a8-3e81-c478-a3aaed8b9a23@nohats.ca> <6c35913b-e938-4b0f-88da-0c07151d2735@bellis.me.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/P3xEHq0kg2kc8DY09z56-qzFA3E>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-08.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 10:41:23 -0000

On Fri, 17 Nov 2023, Ray Bellis wrote:

>>  Last time this came around I also suggested instead of n times QT
>>  entries, to use the same method as NSEC does for conveying which RRtypes
>>  are covered using a single bitmap:
>>
>>  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3845#section-2.1.2
>
> Speaking personally, I am not a fan of NSEC bitmaps when used to encode a 
> small and possibly sparse list of QTYPES.   It's relatively complicated to 
> encode / decode and is often inefficient.

I think it would be unwise to make assumptions on how people will use
this feature. They might want to ask for many more records along with
A/AAAA records. If we change a core DNS feature, it should not designed
for a specific DNSSD use case of HTTPS.

Paul