Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Re: New draft for consideration:

Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Sun, 24 March 2019 16:18 UTC

Return-Path: <joelja@bogus.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 ABCA612423B for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 09:18:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 dL8Tt2WGpYYK for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 09:18:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) (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 0E3DA1200ED for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 09:18:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2601:647:4201:4561:f525:c64b:be39:1c4e] ([IPv6:2601:647:4201:4561:f525:c64b:be39:1c4e]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x2OGHa32038769; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 16:17:38 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-B72172B0-8226-4315-9293-83FDE4F905CA
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16D57)
In-Reply-To: <CAAiTEH9Vi108vt_NwaPxSOnekp5T4++9VE+5akmGFnosEbQQeA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 09:17:36 -0700
Cc: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, bert hubert <bert.hubert@powerdns.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <A2E0B0E9-0D44-45D9-9E83-1BFE5664FB5F@bogus.com>
References: <E2267015-0A5F-4D6E-85F0-3FA93348CA79@icann.org> <20190324101805.GA22597@server.ds9a.nl> <6893EFA4-F413-4C11-828A-13E942AA345C@icann.org> <CAAiTEH9Vi108vt_NwaPxSOnekp5T4++9VE+5akmGFnosEbQQeA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Matthew Pounsett <matt@conundrum.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/bQi7DKHcXUURu2BCkz0A30mgllw>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Re: New draft for consideration:
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: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 16:18:03 -0000


> On Mar 24, 2019, at 08:59, Matthew Pounsett <matt@conundrum.com>; wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sun, 24 Mar 2019 at 11:46, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>; wrote:
>> 
>> > I'm also not too hot for conflating "user consciously changes
>> > /etc/resolv.conf or equivalent" with "application makes the choice for the
>> > user". 
>> 
>> The split here is more "someone changes from traditional without the user knowing, when the user cares". If you have a better way to express that, that would be great.
>> 
>> > Perhaps we should talk about 'Per-application stubs'? Because this is the
>> > nub. 
>> 
>> Maybe, but I'm hesitant to make the break that way because some applications' stubs use the traditional resolver, others don't. I would be hesitant to conflate those two.
> 
> I don't think the current wording for DaO expresses the same point that you've made here.  In particular, mentioning that DaO might refer to a user modifying /etc/resolv.conf is inconsistent with the intent that DaO is sending queries somewhere other than where the traditional configuration says.  /etc/resolv.conf (and its equivalents in non-unix OSes) *are* the traditional place to configure that.  Whatever that file says, I think any resolver that is consulting that file to find its upstreams is doing DaT.

I think we’re at the point where using acronyms is is obscuring the detail of what is being described. If and acronym describes a protocol or an architectural feature that is unambiguous, great. 
> 
> How about:
>    DaO: DNS resolution between a stub resolver and a recursive resolver that
>    differs from the recursive resolver configured in the traditional
>    location(s) for a system. 

This describes a multitude of systems of varying implementation. It would seem for example to include bonjour, a tor client, some vpns and many operating system container environments.

> DaO can be configured by a user changing where a
>    stub resolver gets its list of recursive servers, or an application running
>    RDoT or DoH to a resolver that is not the same as the resolver configured
>    in the traditional location for the operating system.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop