Re: [DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-04.txt

Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 04 July 2017 10:40 UTC

Return-Path: <tjw.ietf@gmail.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 34D12131DEA for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 03:40:26 -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, FREEMAIL_FROM=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 (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 kfOQsMl7h71Z for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 03:40:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x232.google.com (mail-it0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::232]) (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 7F0A6131DE5 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 03:40:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x232.google.com with SMTP id m68so99508476ith.1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Jul 2017 03:40:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/bdbJIUTWzCU6dClwKu3rcv3HHTyXlXcLheHNmXqoI4=; b=JJnTbmcY+M9WrpPpF+PtXzM8M5RS2eo9LVeHa8WdiZL7hBLmOncxyi6E40wQ/SiHgm yNgKx5R8FkJhT62ffpW29lfzGuR28M2sVbqi/1Mkh74hTNRGnPpxZxR0QDvxRZ8hQaFD OGysPbIiZs9idsGxCwkyM3EvdeEMJF7oJoFWHOGT6fbi0ah8dug4dNk/7JDHLg2lsRT/ +RQ0S56bH0Q+MtBL9b8aCX2P1Nna+GFVjN71ro3aqQHmy9mTB1KqRaTomfcm/ekM/DSl WLE+a88ArvYIz+O4VMPL9yMmJBWQtk+qCdrYo2WyG2phblNY+BIQVKm3sVidemIN0OMl NxCw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=/bdbJIUTWzCU6dClwKu3rcv3HHTyXlXcLheHNmXqoI4=; b=npXdbAPsSliqlQq9z4SmOpnZAnQXZDcIOANaMKJKs81opLd/p1Azh0pMXTBZnTY0PC 1ACqHoyVlc1DOthXNgIRFZDH5Cd0YxXFwhczGFc7kPfJbfNB38ye7ipIa6nMa/GESCVs C3u59twUI3bA0V0VYSF9AObdXdjhmY0jYNgr+PJKqMr/jvJDJF0o1adFjbcbwPlvYEaY E65nXqmqKdyYoEFbCfgb/CsbTz4sph3JlvyCa5/jXSHNYb6yP6qnq59jLCm8lLbzTZlj Bc91gS85JoscjhrDejiPKv8JOTipcxIftK8eRZGuHcoi0oRaTgXR2Az9tpFFVIc5stYf 7rLg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOxILyEbjOn2yvbxSIl3isqToaiqdsG5aSi1iRhFs1s+Y4UJIpz5 UWWKA9Jq3ffbnDHropo=
X-Received: by 10.36.117.202 with SMTP id y193mr34986496itc.111.1499164823639; Tue, 04 Jul 2017 03:40:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from twicinski-ltm1.internal.salesforce.com ([50.110.82.183]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id t5sm4117318ita.22.2017.07.04.03.40.22 for <dnsop@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 04 Jul 2017 03:40:22 -0700 (PDT)
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <149910381354.22770.11872478488745133368.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <c30f8582-5371-1ef0-9067-c8c236ed8e42@isc.org> <22874.57189.46244.876797@gro.dd.org> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1707040609320.29386@bofh.nohats.ca>
From: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <978e9cc3-c5d9-87fb-8878-229f4a4c28aa@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2017 06:40:21 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1707040609320.29386@bofh.nohats.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/Rk5vM_Q5aUPrs8aDWhq7FgzxvGw>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-04.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 04 Jul 2017 10:40:26 -0000


On 7/4/17 6:13 AM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Jul 2017, Dave Lawrence wrote:
> 
>>> This is just a "keep alive" so as to keep this draft in consideration as
>>> one of the multiple solutions in this problem space while DNSOP decides
>>> whether this is a problem worth solving.
>>>
>>> I still think it's the most elegant of those proposed ;-)
>>
>> I whole-heartedly agree, as Ray's idea was the basic conclusion I'd
>> arrived at independently.
> 
> I agree.

I remember we discussed the various drafts in a meeting (city of which 
escapes me) and the sense of the people in the room, and the folks I 
talked to afterward was that the preference was for a client to *ask* 
for extra things, rather than the server *forcing* extra answers back.

I think Ray's qtype draft fits this.   The chairs should finally discuss 
having a Call for Adoption on this after we've heard the updates

> 
> And I think any ANAME/ALIAS record should be used in combination with
> these, and of itself not define any new special handling.
> 

Well that's an interesting way to approach it.

> Although, we should also be a bit careful not to create a new ANY type
> query that will get abused for amplification, so it should really all
> have source verified IP transports (DNS-COOKIES, TCP, etc)
> 

The is good guidance, and some wording like this would be useful in the 
qtypes draft.

> Another issue to look at is returning any prefix special records,
> such as TLSA records which do not match the QNAME, but are strongly
> related to the QNAME and would benefit from being returned along.
> 

Excellent idea.  One reason we know why SRV records are not used by many 
is no one wants to do additional lookups.

tim