Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-05

[Tim Wicinski <[e-mail]>]

DNSOP,

Joel our AD sent this note out two weeks ago to get some working group 
consensus on this discussion which came up during the IESG telechat on 
tcp-keepalive

I am in agreement with Joel on this (tcp-keepalive is not the mechanism 
for DTLS), but it should be thought of.

any opinions? I'd like to get some resolution so we can move this along

thanks
tim



On 1/7/16 10:30 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
>  From Stephens discuss, this is a question we should probably answer for
> ourselves. (it's no longer a consideration as a discuss.
>
>    The question: how does this option play with DNS over
>    DTLS? [1]
>
>    The reason I ask is that there may be a need in that case
>    for some similar option (or a TLS extension maybe) though
>    for the DTLS session lifetime and not a TCP session
>    lifetime. At present you are saying that this option is
>    not it. And that's a fine answer but you could also have
>    said that this could also be used for DTLS session
>    lifetime handling. And that last might make sense for
>    operational reasons (not sure really, but could be).
>
>     [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dprive-dnsodtls-03
>
> My take personally is tcp keepalive option is not the mechanism for
> dtls, but then we get multiple options specifying essentially the same
> sort of value at some point in the future.
>
> I just want to make sure we have a good reading on this.
>