IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Mon, 09 March 2015 03:54 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 316941A1A92 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Mar 2015 20:54:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 e81X5SoX0VRx for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Mar 2015 20:54:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [24.104.150.213]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D84C31A1A9B for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 8 Mar 2015 20:54:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:240c:f:1:2001:35cb:f89e:5f57:9ff8] (unknown [IPv6:240c:f:1:2001:35cb:f89e:5f57:9ff8]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0F7541813E; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:54:21 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <54FD1969.3070405@redbarn.org>
Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2015 20:54:17 -0700
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 3.0.11 (Windows/20140602)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
References: <CAH1iCir+h+Kfj1q6JSqhGJ9ev0TQwRDSMci3APKCR=gJAW1phQ@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LFD.2.10.1503082115040.2914@bofh.nohats.ca>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.10.1503082115040.2914@bofh.nohats.ca>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------000002090008030804000009"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/YpJZbghkksjiEKHu2_E7zXhzlYA>
Cc: "dnsop@ietf.org WG" <dnsop@ietf.org>, Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Suggestion for "any" - TCP only
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 03:54:28 -0000


Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Mar 2015, Brian Dickson wrote:
>
>> Given the diagnostic value of "any" (and similarly "RRSIG" et al), I
>> would prefer deprecation of only the UDP version, via mechanisms
>> that are "dig"-friendly.
>
> A better description would be to require "source IP verification",
> so that eastlake-cookies are also an accepted method.

that wouldn't help. the reason for restricting meta-data queries is
completely unrelated to source ip verification either by tcp 3-way
handshake, cookies, or any other method.

>
> Of course, it won't really help amplifications via open resolvers that
> will just actually switch to source IP verification transport.

again, the next revision of olafur's document will remove all mention of
amplification/reflection. that meme is dead.

-- 
Paul Vixie

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email