IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] ANAME in answer or additional section [issue #62]

Anthony Eden <anthony.eden@dnsimple.com> Wed, 12 June 2019 00:12 UTC

Return-Path: <anthony.eden@dnsimple.com>
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 4553412001E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 17:12:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dnsimple.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 B-6cnCGKXhHT for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 17:12:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x32c.google.com (mail-wm1-x32c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32c]) (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 BABB3120074 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 17:12:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x32c.google.com with SMTP id g135so4690447wme.4 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 17:12:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dnsimple.com; s=mail; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=n2nEL4WfIVF05PuT3Qi/K7gGsHtRqBB1itwU8eT2KQU=; b=l5e8+8pgqqHrAYpck8musyf3WFbvSTTe1GdALcQj9VBwxl7hCyDBnHvahJDJ3uOSjX OfPVtdWCjfUv0I+YOIwKnK5nMGxBb4UvF2HBlkAJU4iHV43hxe2eFYkpoOfjYyucjXO8 VHjUOG2MhQeVP21BSJydymTjzZUquhOpPEAqg=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=n2nEL4WfIVF05PuT3Qi/K7gGsHtRqBB1itwU8eT2KQU=; b=nEvqJEQKyPpyzh7EutH9e4Z6i+S3KmL/xtVZJMxDHXwCDt47s7IG2gq1p0zJEO8fxW Uo1ASxeld3w7/tvTbIPXPe46+qHX+n46G6je54BhdLtR1b97cjAhur/MKEAuc3Nzko4K IBaf5T5y2NLeZhT05idm5mC76lKgaGHN5ws5Lv04T88L0sRz8wMvom5XlpRM20Q/rcBl Kn4FvVC6uDsRRavKK93GRLqluKg4et1eQkpO0+PrfP4UMmYV1OXolUeh8oyDieAKzNyx eZwnURrAtRRnATfx0X5gEJJTJfj/QQrLxjdqJ44YNsIYx1q1z3A/uozIWK6x+huLNINF 3abQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVOptb/6+2cdg6RlTpEdPY/oRt31FVYrZXjWwX/GAS96v3c7F/X b3jLaE30w+X6rTeFnqd84OZJaB/dPx+0osrFiIjrSw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxC+VC33WG4TjcF7SAnGyL8Ub2pHr3Tq47Ug5RVOgkYL9Lk9Zhpjh7BppxoE99e4dU4ViCa6D7NuFozo2GVgkw=
X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c842:: with SMTP id c2mr19497357wml.28.1560298323025; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 17:12:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3b136e34-7ec0-e144-2c2a-0885185ec2b1@pletterpet.nl> <20190612000459.GA60387@isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20190612000459.GA60387@isc.org>
From: Anthony Eden <anthony.eden@dnsimple.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 20:11:51 -0400
Message-ID: <CAOZSDgCB5wmnYEP4Kf6v7v6tY=F=jwX3zFS04vCt5GmwOq07Sw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Evan Hunt <each@isc.org>
Cc: Matthijs Mekking <matthijs@pletterpet.nl>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000049b93e058b154371"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/ZVXdZtF3ioKJTEjYkKlBHeyPyE8>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] ANAME in answer or additional section [issue #62]
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 12 Jun 2019 00:12:07 -0000

I'm a fan of Michael's suggestion of using EDNS to signal that the
authoritative should return ALIAS vs synthesizing. Any reason this won't
work?

-Anthony

On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 8:05 PM Evan Hunt <each@isc.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 10:31:55AM +0200, Matthijs Mekking wrote:
> > The main argument for putting it in the answer section is that putting
> > it in the additional section implies a lower trust level, and that the
> > record is optional and can be removed when minimizing responses.
>
> I'm inclined to favor this argument (probably unsurprisingly, since I'm the
> one who argued it).
>
> IMHO, the ANAME is the real answer we're sending; the A and AAAA records
> are just friendly hand-holding for legacy servers.  It doesn't make sense
> to me to demote the real answer into the additional section, any more than
> it would have to move DNAME there. The protocol specificaions are clear on
> this point - the more so considering we've already deployed DNAME - and my
> sympathies for an implementation that got it wrong would be limited.
>
> That said, if any resolver implementations are known to choke if they see
> an unexpected extra RRset in the answer section, it would be good to find
> out about it. I guess we should do some testing.
>
> Hm, stub resolvers might be stupider than full resolvers. Perhaps it
> would be useful to differentiate RD=0 and RD=1?
>
> --
> Evan Hunt -- each@isc.org
> Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>


-- 
DNSimple.com
http://dnsimple.com/
Twitter: @dnsimple

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email