Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only
Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Mon, 09 March 2015 01:19 UTC
Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 3D2331A0074 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Mar 2015 18:19:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 DgMlJP8Lg0Xh for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Mar 2015 18:19:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B7FC81A005C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 8 Mar 2015 18:19:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3l0hXR4SlMz7ZP; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 02:19:03 +0100 (CET)
Authentication-Results: mx.nohats.ca; dkim=pass reason="1024-bit key; unprotected key" header.d=nohats.ca header.i=@nohats.ca header.b=VmFHNBYY; dkim-adsp=pass
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 x3jXnm6q701C; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 02:19:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (206-248-139-105.dsl.teksavvy.com [206.248.139.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 02:19:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36D8A813B1; Sun, 8 Mar 2015 21:19:02 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1425863942; bh=TVtTUCqtonYHLNztL/oNrRJGjkQfssWwDCMARIAo3/c=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=VmFHNBYYbJPUuNNvQs9+YL0yXwtsJEDMTqdGh0qFxwRo+1E/Wo4PnxR7wTbE4dkzI O6FzKGcQJ+9zNBejx+eCYrGXyVPQdy82utCi62ta37iCIuQf7cWpaTETliLtKt/Myk UER8RB22R0lRiQLeHEn3QaaAbF+RAZXSF34R/zMI=
Received: from localhost (paul@localhost) by bofh.nohats.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) with ESMTP id t291J1vg011816; Sun, 8 Mar 2015 21:19:01 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: bofh.nohats.ca: paul owned process doing -bs
Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2015 21:19:01 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAH1iCir+h+Kfj1q6JSqhGJ9ev0TQwRDSMci3APKCR=gJAW1phQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.10.1503082115040.2914@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <CAH1iCir+h+Kfj1q6JSqhGJ9ev0TQwRDSMci3APKCR=gJAW1phQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.10 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/RVKOpb2GW-aCcOf3GSyzhTZGZHo>
Cc: "dnsop@ietf.org WG" <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only
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: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 01:19:09 -0000
On Sun, 8 Mar 2015, Brian Dickson wrote: > Given the diagnostic value of "any" (and similarly "RRSIG" et al), I would prefer deprecation of only the UDP version, via mechanisms > that are "dig"-friendly. A better description would be to require "source IP verification", so that eastlake-cookies are also an accepted method. Of course, it won't really help amplifications via open resolvers that will just actually switch to source IP verification transport. Paul
- [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only Brian Dickson
- Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only Ralf Weber
- Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only Oliver Peter
- Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only Hugo Maxwell Connery