Re: [DNSOP] Proposal for a new record type: SNI

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 21 February 2017 00:59 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 B16BE12955B for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 16:59:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=GHk5dUce; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=R4ljq/MD
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 ox-6NBx4b6lY for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 16:59:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33D86129561 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 16:59:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 34521 invoked from network); 21 Feb 2017 00:59:37 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=86d7.58ab90f9.k1702; bh=06hQpLn7zA1Czw/SeuuOMq/Omh0kpzLfWaxDgLablNQ=; b=GHk5dUce9rSghtlTcXcbBDHnAr8dGIY4Zo8WmlExNfvV6icsJDlT/lKsI0NhkOZOiporPe1eTGqIailCko94LUuQEZmoc/GvUf1XNigU9sFwfaPp6NuP8xgrEqO3QHwziN70FZ0t5p5XcqQVTEgY9Oc6OAB/XiyKxdtfoJAftJls8WQ3tnDgzSP4K/B5R+WoYiTG9tSPplQX8nnYVTkJzMQ2V9eikDp0DDnnrjnO5hrJsZMXvFKOgCFNdzhZtttW
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=86d7.58ab90f9.k1702; bh=06hQpLn7zA1Czw/SeuuOMq/Omh0kpzLfWaxDgLablNQ=; b=R4ljq/MDCEpLEnwFiNhEEnj1L7JO/mmv+Qfq0omHnz5WEc39M/VmayLU5dIKTjd5X5dqg/9hB4tWHdqFaLNFFwdqyCoQPYN9t1dxI4qodvDnkSIXkzOClpXqva4+mj3115TONv79kn92Jvp4IEBzwOZWF7fU9loC067JDbW+yq5+jhHYXs1BBFk260xJ7VG8aByakMStyYrJDe/IbSbFsk49wL55dij7UVtx8LQDLR16n0qxox0gOb/fcGcKC1R2
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2/X.509/AEAD) via TCP6; 21 Feb 2017 00:59:37 -0000
Date: 20 Feb 2017 16:59:36 -0800
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.20.1702201658540.6623@ary.local>
From: "John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: "Robert Edmonds" <edmonds@mycre.ws>
In-Reply-To: <20170221000624.wxgvpytby7ozznxe@mycre.ws>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1702201458030.23970@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <20170220211925.1906.qmail@ary.lan> <CAHw9_i+3zDg5tTnPOstiGcH6RvjnAJgNKpkeHV=0-+mN7VNAxQ@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.20.1702201527550.6009@ary.local> <20170221000624.wxgvpytby7ozznxe@mycre.ws>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (OSX 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/g1E8eXhTESQFHgEKgnBmxbfkQfQ>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Proposal for a new record type: SNI
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, 21 Feb 2017 00:59:46 -0000

>> script to find the cert hashes that will reveal the specific site is too
>> hard so never mind?
>
> Isn't the server's certificate encrypted in TLS 1.3?

Yes, but Tony's proposal as I understood it was to use the hash from a 
TLSA certificate instead of the text of the SNI domain.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly