IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] [TCP] Review of draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-00.txt

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Mon, 09 March 2015 16:32 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3241E1A8937 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 09:32:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.56
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.56 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 n1PbBttyy4Uv for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 09:32:54 -0700 (PDT)
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 658261A8882 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 09:32:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id D62AD28059C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 17:32:47 +0100 (CET)
Received: from relay1.nic.fr (relay1.nic.fr [192.134.4.162]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D23FB28051D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 17:32:47 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (unknown [IPv6:2001:67c:1348:7::86:133]) by relay1.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6E104C0053 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 17:32:17 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 17:32:17 +0100
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20150309163217.GA31109@nic.fr>
References: <20141204135801.12482.73201.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <20150104174226.GA23493@sources.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150104174226.GA23493@sources.org>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 8.0
X-Kernel: Linux 3.16.0-4-686-pae i686
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/hln1HgiCR9Hs4UVYBjMTwwcm2iY>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [TCP] Review of draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 16:32:57 -0000

I re-send here two questions that have apparently not been addressed
in -01

On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 06:42:26PM +0100,
 Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> wrote 
 a message of 37 lines which said:

> Section 3, "some network devices deliberately refuse to handle DNS
> packets containing EDNS0 options" Isn't it true of DNS-over-TCP as
> well? SAC035 is pessimistic (see table 2). Do we have other data on
> TCP (lack of) support in middleboxes?

> In the same section, should we add a word about poisoning attacks?
> AFAIK, at least one resolver, CNS, switches to TCP when it receives
> too many answers with the wrong Query ID. Should we document that
> the use of TCP may make poisoning more difficult?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email