Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Call for Adoption - draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale

神明達哉 <> Thu, 07 September 2017 18:33 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E0AC13263F for <>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 11:33:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.699
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jD0CxwInz16Y for <>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 11:33:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8762132F7E for <>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 11:33:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id m35so1401700qte.1 for <>; Thu, 07 Sep 2017 11:33:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=eocNpxAog0NFonReZwTPGsY5LfVRhPvlmG0hbQUeils=; b=Z7EvKIaPRwe/Otm1+BwTXgeMlAJz4r/Z9HvOCFJOkOI5iMakTe3m3i4Ubu4KEhkzc4 bWXVxtfKg9zOFj/D0QFQnkNGBkxpGX8GdX2dV8ZQ7hPJqrv8I1PzGzs/q9GqoxkyQ4LI iEVV/awZn8zCI1mO9/4uIB4JlMEgvIXEAuPGrfm/G971csJJ9aWQlWIqZZHV3CYKaLlu t/3HdOyVmVYVBbA2w5DTNwZQJ8/9CpoNmPHXWp6wUzrA6Svus4pH6n8GqqUv5qacBVQj 1kF6zmu9Iok25RwxmUUwOYq9rXnocK+S1T/yME9qleDQJqwJq78tQD9aHDyPGDC+Ddh+ uLrw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=eocNpxAog0NFonReZwTPGsY5LfVRhPvlmG0hbQUeils=; b=QYzchA+uJxZ5vjyrIuINHeXrTPksAEsnhXXBY0wQo5yx+WIj7VOfE62hZL49NpBhrN IeD+EyhTogHw6OwdId2+aXUgOtPRMG4ANjLfVzD73vCkWzpvSpDdYn4ttGMowUKJLjtV C21opFl3WYhk5c6cdEDA5iYsLd8i2auukNgHQ563ni5hwEzvvxFX2Cq4C5Fi5DpDF/uK QfWhsCtQefOWxp+nqPZGV5Y6DCdNj8ysRMAlAZAKWn3Mv/+Ok3TxW9zMgszwg3+teuNY DAsE6/UY18t/X8HtW7o67i27126UHQPxraJ/5KVJDFibuSxGW8HWucsWiR+99Ikt79v6 vc9w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUijq4GvQIxGqGzXdXAxJEDps39VrCBbKYspgYdPTs3jj0Zlh4Dv 6dl0te0IidpRlBWc0cmBJYO8tNg4Zg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QAHkduxvVVcOcMVzppU9Q2hGB0w/SN+Fg39D9rQFV2cqlNzUk8LAsBuRbHy1iP5s4Um7Mx7tEThSW0/OgIFecw=
X-Received: by with SMTP id t1mr306985qte.246.1504809202862; Thu, 07 Sep 2017 11:33:22 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 11:33:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <>
From: 神明達哉 <>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 11:33:22 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 3h-sRYH7hsdvtrgWyPrz_ZG2On0
Message-ID: <>
To: Wes Hardaker <>
Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer <>, tjw ietf <>, dnsop <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Call for Adoption - draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 18:33:25 -0000

At Thu, 07 Sep 2017 10:36:50 -0700,
Wes Hardaker <> wrote:

> > I'm not enthousiastic. We should focus on making the DNS
> > infrastructure more reliable, not on adding something to a pile of
> > already fragile protocols.
> I don't believe we have any ideas how to make infrastructure more
> reliable in the face of DDoS attacks.


If we don't work on a proposal like this, I'd love to see a specific
counter proposal that doesn't violate the current protocol
specification (i.e., using a cached answer beyond its TTL) and still
avoids resolution failure when authoritative servers are forced to be
non-responsive due to huge scale DoS attacks.  Otherwise the more
likely scenario is that some vendors still keep a similar protocol
violation using marketing decoration like "smartness" while other
compliant implementors just look incompetent (and this will be a huge
incentive for the latter group to follow the former, and we'll just
see more proliferation of this violation).

JINMEI, Tatuya