IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Future of "Using DNAME in the DNS root zone for sinking of special-use TLDs" ?

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Fri, 14 October 2016 15:48 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 9379C129649 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 08:48:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.996
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.996 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 knCRbe1A7zFm for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 08:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (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 1423A129853 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 08:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3swX7r0R0Lz394; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 17:48:40 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1476460120; bh=jw1MEekMqkuzjTDlNmFzPNijBBwKBXQp01f/S6+hPBw=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=RUNtWD6PmYTVjGB/GmnQovnuA1KpOkOjzaV6vyWdVm1S/ZUVBPc0uotl1kIL9C0Ih dWhTzZMIY3DUPLXeqtfY9FIbBgC2xFgBU7+erJXlQjDz0wAE2oL46ggOr2mNf30Pmr w9uy0Sn8t1yhctssa3FkTO4vF6TL9RaL1LmSczF0=
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 fHzxKQpvEwiZ; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 17:48:39 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 17:48:39 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 284264533EB; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 11:48:38 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 bofh.nohats.ca 284264533EB
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 142A940D3585; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 11:48:38 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 11:48:37 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
In-Reply-To: <20161014140905.saqke7xyferwtrig@nic.fr>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.20.1610141146120.21572@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <20161014133135.2n3wuh2n5sb3jqt7@nic.fr> <alpine.LRH.2.20.1610141002540.16905@bofh.nohats.ca> <20161014140905.saqke7xyferwtrig@nic.fr>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (LRH 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/VzWM3FpyTJT6zOAEKt0bmS42B6E>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Future of "Using DNAME in the DNS root zone for sinking of special-use TLDs" ?
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 14 Oct 2016 15:48:47 -0000

On Fri, 14 Oct 2016, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

>     "Using DNAME in the DNS root zone for sinking  of special-use TLDs" ?
> 
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 10:04:21AM -0400,
> Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> wrote
> a message of 19 lines which said:
>
>> But by adding delegations in the root to AS112, aren't we making it
>> more likely that the queries leak further onto the net?
>
> That's precisely the point described in section 6, second paragraph.

The difference is between "doing the draft and reducing the problem
caused" versus "this problem is big enough to not do the draft".

I do not know yet where I stand on this. I do feel that since we are
talking about "bad old DNS software" that wouldn't already be suppressing
special use names, it is most likely that this old software also does
not support DNAMEs.

Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email