IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] New draft, seeking comments: draft-sah-resolver-information

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 03 May 2019 15:51 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 F28F41200CE for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 May 2019 08:51:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=K73PKg5a; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=GRLyl4G1
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 sFibt1P-Te1R for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 May 2019 08:51:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 12E9012004B for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 May 2019 08:51:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 70742 invoked from network); 3 May 2019 15:51:34 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-id:user-agent; s=11452.5ccc6386.k1905; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=SOr85VlgsmioBM4KbaEblwNF29QA3mhdmR2g8gqE8JM=; b=K73PKg5a9JsOimlA81rEDTEUko2Xwf/Fmwdf4J93UgoGWiRsZ8O5zakMWAsruO7pgYOwtBn1lrx4oIue3P96/BoO5SAxUqqpDnkQpodbu+fZQf7ojXGYH+7VaFU409/A54yRl8p0o/0DYF5OyAuBcUn/+m7LK44bM/IfUls3sFM0MUH3Z2P40wNJTp2RoGgW6s//6svUI0a+ojFChn0rVCWmTbm4lWoxzHBgc8zAA3a2+2d9KY4EkapCwKx8jV69
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-id:user-agent; s=11452.5ccc6386.k1905; olt=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=SOr85VlgsmioBM4KbaEblwNF29QA3mhdmR2g8gqE8JM=; b=GRLyl4G1fVRoGL5NSO7sRSqneijbQcsfK11lcgwfVGkZB1WuSh6JKAeumNpLiEJuT7oc10+Vf0lRpw2m9Om2/3ri2RxIS6zz8L/3dLm4mqnfQKQGnBA6QDtvl5oggZpfz3OD8woJYQ6ZdKLHFzAXdLUNFCCWU/PfrBh2C/AciyVe2zaV3s55XKwcRazNhQoiEvTXLk4miroExLqVAUwFeOFTGLr8Al6w058c9YeCdZ7wp6N6eAem3tbmdvTzneHE
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, johnl@iecc.com) via TCP6; 03 May 2019 15:51:33 -0000
Date: Fri, 03 May 2019 11:51:33 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1905031108440.61118@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Vladimír Čunát <vladimir.cunat+ietf@nic.cz>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <1b371074-2500-40ec-2627-00b3f46e8114@nic.cz>
References: <20190502205938.604982013404D1@ary.qy> <1b371074-2500-40ec-2627-00b3f46e8114@nic.cz>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (OSX 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="0-518062943-1556896877=:61118"
Content-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1905031150520.61118@ary.qy>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/S-G_Vxkk6Mb0oVg-yp_GKs61KJ4>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] New draft, seeking comments: draft-sah-resolver-information
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 03 May 2019 15:51:39 -0000

>> server.  I suppose you could find your DoH server by name, but if you
>> can do that, you could equally well find your DoT or .well-known
>> server by name and define the problem out of existence.
>
> I think it's best to verify by name, even if the DNS server is reached
> through a hard-configured IP.  That's what we implemented for Knot
> Resolver, at least.  On a related note, I'd also expect to send the name
> as SNI by default; 8.8.8.8 was not even sending me a certificate unless
> I sent SNI (only when using TLS 1.3 though)

When I said verify by name I meant by DNS name, so the certs can be signed 
by the existing ACME protocol or whatever.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email