Re: [DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-pan-dnsop-swild-rr-type-00.txt

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Wed, 16 August 2017 18:44 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
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 A7027126B6E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 11:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-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 TFE3jv4OJRGP for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 11:44:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [IPv6:2001:559:8000:cd::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1C1113237B for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 11:44:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2602:306:8074:1ac0:8c44:219f:380c:bf7c] (unknown [IPv6:2602:306:8074:1ac0:8c44:219f:380c:bf7c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BDECD61FF3; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 18:44:53 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <599492A3.6010604@redbarn.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 11:44:51 -0700
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 5.0.16 (Windows/20170718)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Davey Song <songlinjian@gmail.com>
CC: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
References: <149908054910.760.8140876567010458934.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAAiTEH8ntOerB6MGKMS2xcCK3TL9n4fyLq6F+bpUY6oTUpWN8w@mail.gmail.com> <CANLjSvWOzaJcVL64BhNFKnTUEgfq06TQtoy=ZNJ_JafvPU1aSA@mail.gmail.com> <1659363.yAWSxLQAC2@tums.local> <CAAObRXJQx9o88erF1JvaXfQbvRY1j2nTwh1N=DrZw7QWs1Fncw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAObRXJQx9o88erF1JvaXfQbvRY1j2nTwh1N=DrZw7QWs1Fncw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/fBuPfD_hnXIjhuErDfBsK5aqhQY>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-pan-dnsop-swild-rr-type-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 16 Aug 2017 18:44:56 -0000


Davey Song wrote:
> If any operator would like to implement SWILD without DNSSEC or NAT44
> without IPv6, It's OK. It maybe a good solution in their network for
> their custormer. I do know many people and solutions walk around DNSSEC,
> IPv6 (due to IPsec) and TLS for surveillance issues. But IETF as a
> worldwide standard body has its position on the technical path towards a
> better Internet.

agreed. and, see also:

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/ObCNmWcsFPNTIdMX5fmbuJoKFR8

noting that DNSSEC isn't a form of confidentiality, the general spirit 
of the IAB's position as linked above, supports a co-goal of end-to-end 
authenticity. i see no reason to expend community development effort, or 
to add complexity costs, on alternatives in whole or in part to DNSSEC, 
unless it's a complete replacement protocol, or complete abandonment of 
the goal itself.

-- 
P Vixie