Re: [DNSOP] AS112 for TLDs

["Joe Baptista" <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Florian Weimer <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Or sign the root and use aggressive negative caching (which is currently
> prohibited by the RFCs, I'm told).


Think extra zone :)


> I agree that information leakage is a problem.  Curiously enough, no
> root server or TLD operators that I know of has From [e-mail]  Sun Apr  6 06:05:34 2008
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
X-Original-To: [e-mail]
Delivered-To: [e-mail]
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 106A83A69DE;
	Sun,  6 Apr 2008 06:05:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: [e-mail]
Delivered-To: [e-mail]
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCB553A69DE
	for <[e-mail]>; Sun,  6 Apr 2008 06:05:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.976
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5
	tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
	by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 0PWhgVs4HX8R for <[e-mail]>;
	Sun,  6 Apr 2008 06:05:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com (wf-out-1314.google.com [209.85.200.172])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C7F53A69FE
	for <[e-mail]>; Sun,  6 Apr 2008 06:05:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 25so978296wfa.31
	for <[e-mail]>; Sun, 06 Apr 2008 06:05:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth;
	bh=aI41NQONF6aaOmJ5A/65LAvDT+aa21t4EHX8NqxToyY=;
	b=NNQmH+kQjLe4ZLH1J9PNstKWsD3SulGbq8CdMjZ5x5leAGbN+9hSp6/0NKmBj2Y6bhYcK+kUHhpMKLi3i0SD7OWY6ki9c88LRzP5lrc4W7cyJ+OIrEQpc+gY80hA1M9YBO+stbon44JHwMbCaA5+vtx24Syp7mJl/ZopXXbecuE=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth;
	b=k5jsGHMbOwaq5L4/bvFtg1upUNb1SBIZAebx5+RfRj5FMZkIGjNCE1RGB1NC2hzbsnxE46xv4872g0RFRHWa0jNynNM3a3HL29QxvVQT9wF01wzlkBIfyBC/Qn8XQUJz2Q2MNAkvYng4ahZInPJayfYeth/nKgI6AxaK8eE9SdQ=
Received: by 10.143.159.11 with SMTP id l11mr1943790wfo.186.1207487124299;
	Sun, 06 Apr 2008 06:05:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.142.216.10 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Apr 2008 06:05:24 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2008 09:05:24 -0400
From: "Joe Baptista" <[e-mail]>
To: "Florian Weimer" <[e-mail]>
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <[e-mail]>
	<[e-mail]>
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 6c8ea7157f11a72b
Cc: [e-mail], Mark Andrews <[e-mail]>,
	Edward Lewis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] AS112 for TLDs
X-BeenThere: [e-mail]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>,
	<mailto:[e-mail]?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/dnsop>
List-Post: <mailto:[e-mail]>
List-Help: <mailto:[e-mail]?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>,
	<mailto:[e-mail]?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0004368716=="
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]

On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Florian Weimer <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Or sign the root and use aggressive negative caching (which is currently
> prohibited by the RFCs, I'm told).


Think extra zone :)


> I agree that information leakage is a problem.  Curiously enough, no
> root server or TLD operators that I know of has pupublished some sort of
> privacy statement that underlines how they deal with this issue.


They are not the ones generating this traffic.  Its users as they cross over
dns zones.  i.e. travelers from china staying at a hotel in the USA who
can't access their language script idn national china tlds via the legacy
IANA root.



> It's
> also the reason why I think that AS112 for TLDs will not fly.


It will.  Makes the perfect dns equivalent of the bin bucket trash can.
However the question remains - does it help the user in the end.  Would it
be more appropriate in my example above that the legacy root simply
recognize Chinese national tlds?  That would get rid of some of the error
traffic of the root and do a service to travelers from china.

Think users - not roots.

cheers
joe baptista

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop