IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] About draft-ietf-dnsop-extended-error

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Tue, 21 November 2017 16:32 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
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 49D89126D46 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 08:32:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] 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 fQkTnFpUuAbW for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 08:32:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (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 C9D8D129571 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 08:32:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 11AB9281BF5 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 17:32:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 0C5F4281C05; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 17:32:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (relay01.prive.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:15::11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 059EB281BF5 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 17:32:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.users.prive.nic.fr [10.10.86.133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0330C663EBE0 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 17:32:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EC2FC3FE26; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 17:32:13 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 17:32:13 +0100
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20171121163213.xhy4d3cowf6u7f47@nic.fr>
References: <20171112012835.GA16257@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1711131236140.14243@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <yblmv3psjmk.fsf@wu.hardakers.net> <20171114073227.GO3322@mournblade.imrryr.org> <3b429f8e-1046-e70d-ab9f-0ac4ba735232@time-travellers.org> <20171114084725.GP3322@mournblade.imrryr.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171114084725.GP3322@mournblade.imrryr.org>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.2
X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-3-amd64 x86_64
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.020362, version=1.2.2
X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2017.11.21.162417
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/hPhJRuj9WND-TVyrSf5zOs2HxME>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] About draft-ietf-dnsop-extended-error
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: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 16:32:18 -0000

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 08:47:25AM +0000,
 Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org> wrote 
 a message of 27 lines which said:

> > RCODE: SUCCESS (NODATA)
> > Extended code: ERRBLACKLIST
> > Explanation: "Client blacklisted for IPv6 queries"
> 
> Well, once we're in the "lying with DNS" business, we hardly need
> to restrict extended diagnostics to errors, we can equally contemplate
> them for policy-based answers that don't reflect the authoritative
> zone content... :-8

May be you were joking but I'm serious and I think it would be a good
idea. For instance, extended "error" codes for "This is not the real
IP address, I lied to protect you from malware/pedoporn/terrorism"
would be very useful (see RFC 7725).

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email