Re: [DNSOP] Status of "let localhost be localhost"?

Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> Wed, 02 August 2017 13:38 UTC

Return-Path: <rlb@ipv.sx>
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 51E0D132010 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 06:38:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ipv-sx.20150623.gappssmtp.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 Y-IWjrothUTS for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 06:38:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr0-x22a.google.com (mail-wr0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::22a]) (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 5C62513204F for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 06:38:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id y43so18876570wrd.3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 02 Aug 2017 06:38:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ipv-sx.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xgzzLQsfnlPaxMNoANq5rn3rzdYk8T/c2A1teClYi10=; b=of6QnFABllmzonxUwz91YaKVq+WBJS8EIn4d36op59HVouLHwK1f4eOck/DltkTkkt ruPOgG2HKr6I8EaA63ONZHZYvtmT9sA7sLbrjU1Mk40vAMVaf2fPUA4HV5SMCbUrMtxE WfXd2bGdfaVC0YiI9tVQWSNzKH7T4U+Zbhmrwpvf78RM3K6GAiFU8xA6CsFaE966KrwH XwSaUj6n2c+cEGgh6yG6mQ1MYXLGAxcOO06kZli/wzLNxklJoVpL1arlMzI7ZqEl9Zlu EM3YDbNwiY77QOf8rYyGOMDKbXhxueMDSRWpywKryrz7PyTyPaweydTpkNee1UOjcQ/+ iFDw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xgzzLQsfnlPaxMNoANq5rn3rzdYk8T/c2A1teClYi10=; b=HjiPbtBcCLFINdZHDuI908E/91/tKdlARWZCPMZDoGnVNzWw1zelcXoCIGsfLl3mrN D+1SNc2jexqhFKZJ/0r+00OXZV4rCkQdzL42KaRuXw2O7dVGWLzu0veT9HUgckJJ4RcA 4uROuO+O++Qe8yXtyevmIy+nrWuBRsH2+jJzwbGawDa33uoXXrIHtSkZnlrCovoIKs0j 0e9WbFVZhg0l6xyGk4/X9+rCIwsRNNDZakkHMnMX0fpjC19YLEQBczgv0Y1tYegYgOCu 7ELST2Nfhlgn1unet2av8z1LO7s4UPIgQqm0Cna7wuDHCChosmUeh9oKgiijMbv2q98Y 08GA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw1126WrpnWj1eNtzgFPvdXgLLdQi3N60lvz3zxjc8znmzy6ya232B eArbHcKLze6qaD8b5U0aVPzESNfu5quS
X-Received: by 10.223.161.84 with SMTP id r20mr18525957wrr.91.1501681092751; Wed, 02 Aug 2017 06:38:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.28.225.5 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 06:38:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <7019539A-48B1-4FA2-801D-20A78D85B339@hopcount.ca>
References: <05e469cf-1325-89fc-4a81-661f8647e869@eff.org> <CAKXHy=ctB=LZkX9j=8-Jy0NkTAs2tAesa4gmFhfp94O5=9U4TA@mail.gmail.com> <1dbb47a4-c6e2-97d2-a1d7-ce6c65a4042a@eff.org> <20170802012345.2CE2680BCC5E@rock.dv.isc.org> <CAKXHy=e48CqjPPj-kXu34ptqSipgvJDRkVjHRwwDezCKvepFtQ@mail.gmail.com> <7019539A-48B1-4FA2-801D-20A78D85B339@hopcount.ca>
From: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 09:38:12 -0400
Message-ID: <CAL02cgQoS4r33WypArMFQHuRD38XcLfV2Y2qju+ooqykYc2ATw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
Cc: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>, Jacob Hoffman-Andrews <jsha@eff.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045e302c19cd5b0555c5609e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/U9cEjIuY5hDhvfs76gWKQ9qgNLs>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Status of "let localhost be localhost"?
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: Wed, 02 Aug 2017 13:38:16 -0000

On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 9:34 AM, Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> wrote:

> Hi Mike,
>
> On Aug 2, 2017, at 09:54, Mike West <mkwst@google.com> wrote:
>
> What would you like to see in the document in order to address this
> concern? A requirement that a `localhost` zone be created and delegated as
> an insecure delegation, using some of the language from the draft above
> (e.g. "This delegation MUST NOT be signed, MUST NOT include a DS record,
> and MUST point to one or more black hole servers, for example '
> blackhole-1.iana.org.' and 'blackhole-2.iana.org.'.")?
> Any such delegation would be lame, and is a bad idea just for that reason.
> There's no foolproof way to add or drop zones hosted on the whole AS112
> server ssystem due to the lack of coordination between AS112 node operators
> -- despite the good communication between many such operators, there's no
> good way to tell what nodes you don't know about.
>
> If you really wanted to sink queries in the top-level domain LOCALHOST a
> better approach would to use DNAME (see RFC 7535). But note that I'm not
> expressing an opinion on whether that's a good idea, either philosophically
> or practically, in this specific example.
>

It seems like the desired behavior for the DNS infrastructure here is the
same as for .onion -- return NXDOMAIN.  After all, these are queries that
should never leave the end host, so anything not on the host should handle
them as an error.

cf. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7686#section-2




>
>
> Joe
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>
>