Re: [DNSOP] "Optimization" in draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation

Jelte Jansen <jelte.jansen@sidn.nl> Tue, 06 January 2015 08:37 UTC

Return-Path: <Jelte.Jansen@sidn.nl>
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 8F1A71A1BED for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 00:37:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.084
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.084 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 7anDX4PkivDX for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 00:37:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from arn2-kamx.sidn.nl (kamx.sidn.nl [IPv6:2a00:d78:0:147:94:198:152:69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6FCB1A0196 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 00:37:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; d=sidn.nl; s=sidn_nl; c=relaxed/relaxed; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-originating-ip; bh=WQOG5oNR73+rvXHp6WuM4/MvH3P/FM60D5LXc03oj5E=; b=wHDSvpDoz78zxYW9bK8fZApVYElcXtS8e+8ap8QtWYbdW2df/juO8CkK8nn60KLXFtoBjnES8ltfVjj+4kDZFiXyHZiHvnyhtmZjO5460lYSuhHTKumgOmT91aEFsGlJuPrxohNuArl581gg+EDE0Op/wZm/Zdr5+i1zYO/dn9Q=
Received: from kahubcasn01.SIDN.local ([192.168.2.73]) by arn2-kamx.sidn.nl with ESMTP id t068bG2j028013-t068bG2l028013 (version=TLSv1.0 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=CAFAIL); Tue, 6 Jan 2015 09:37:16 +0100
Received: from zen.sidnlabs.nl (94.198.152.218) by kahubcasn01.SIDN.local (192.168.2.77) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.174.1; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 09:37:15 +0100
Message-ID: <54AB9E97.3010108@sidn.nl>
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 09:36:39 +0100
From: Jelte Jansen <jelte.jansen@sidn.nl>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bob Harold <rharolde@umich.edu>, "dnsop@ietf.org WG" <dnsop@ietf.org>
References: <CAH1iCirCRpJxHWu62nCSTCmSumXfTNHi=-jt5eWXzRgspJjm9w@mail.gmail.com> <CAH1iCip7iGgM=eiaVcy3fHx+KdOJgd5Rh8zLsnDPMgoEnE-HvA@mail.gmail.com> <0BB798D6-60F4-492D-819A-EF4E0F5848B5@virtualized.org> <20150104193602.GA23109@sources.org> <4FF33728-5940-475A-AA41-A197295388AD@virtualized.org> <5D8FEE1D-1283-4F67-B5B9-E2572C3D2185@vpnc.org> <CA+nkc8CtWO1xSy7QwBXbM2U50YuK0G_D+59GdH+s4LCpcT70Ug@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+nkc8CtWO1xSy7QwBXbM2U50YuK0G_D+59GdH+s4LCpcT70Ug@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [94.198.152.218]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/_6B8oTFDCIFV0ItVLZG28YJhG-g
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] "Optimization" in draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation
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: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 08:37:20 -0000

On 01/05/2015 05:55 PM, Bob Harold wrote:
> Does anyone have actual data on how common it is, so we can make an
> informed decision?
> 
> I would expect "www.something..." to be in the same zone as
> "something..." in most cases, so I think it is actually very common to
> have more than one level on the same DNS.
> 

Would you? I'd expect 'www' there to be in 'something', and 'something'
to be in a TLD (assuming context of a 3-label domain, not counting root)

So for www to be in the same as something would mean it'd be in the TLD...

Not saying that it might still not be common, but 'www' is not a good
example, IMHO.

The other question is not whether it is common, but whether the
optimization is actually as benificial as one might think.

Jelte