Re: [DNSOP] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-yao-dnsop-accompanying-questions-00.txt

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Tue, 03 May 2016 15:36 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 C380112D529 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2016 08:36:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996] autolearn=no 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 sl-9ILQTGKMs for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2016 08:36:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (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 D508912D0FE for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 May 2016 08:36:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3qzldj3kWXzCbC; Tue, 3 May 2016 17:36:41 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zfSV_e7weriH; Tue, 3 May 2016 17:36:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (206-248-139-105.dsl.teksavvy.com [206.248.139.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 3 May 2016 17:36:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A6F4939D3A4; Tue, 3 May 2016 11:36:39 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 bofh.nohats.ca A6F4939D3A4
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BDDF4391ABD; Tue, 3 May 2016 11:36:39 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 03 May 2016 11:36:39 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>
In-Reply-To: <4c9cedfc-1cb4-3b78-02e4-b12374a6b4c3@bellis.me.uk>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.20.1605031134030.8954@bofh7.nohats.ca>
References: <20160429090023503461119@cnnic.cn> <57232B9B.7060608@bellis.me.uk> <20160503142134612458162@cnnic.cn> <4c9cedfc-1cb4-3b78-02e4-b12374a6b4c3@bellis.me.uk>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (LRH 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/dmm3J1FB-f2ralNRIf486Ajcy7E>
Cc: yaojk <yaojk@cnnic.cn>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-yao-dnsop-accompanying-questions-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Tue, 03 May 2016 15:36:46 -0000

On Tue, 3 May 2016, Ray Bellis wrote:

>> another examples are : 1, when querying DNSSEC records for
>> www.example.com <http://www.example.com>, it normally needs querying
>> example.com too for DNSSEC verification.
>
> Hmm...   Isn't "EDNS chain query" supposed to solve this?

Yes.

>> 2, DKIM exmaple in Appendix A of rfc5617
>>
>> Appendix A.  Lookup Examples
>>
>> aaa.example                  A     192.0.2.1        (1)
>> _adsp._domainkey.aaa.example TXT   "dkim=all"       (2)
>>
>> bbb.example                  MX 10 mail.bbb.example (3)
>> mail.bbb.example             A     192.0.2.2        (4)
>
> The RFC 5617 text following these examples describes those lookups as
> sequential - I'd defer to the authors of those (John Levine reads this
> list) as to whether it would be appropriate to perform those lookups in
> parallel.

It would be nice if you do a qtype=mx lookup that you could get the
related records. Whether it is dmarc or tlsa or ipseckey. But what
happened is that we moved those type of records to a different location
from the qname. So that made this proposed feature a lot less
interesting.

Paul