Re: [DNSOP] private-use in-meeting chat comments

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Tue, 17 November 2020 21:46 UTC

Return-Path: <dot@dotat.at>
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 EDEF23A0A2E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 13:46:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 Bxt5RxCeT2IW for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 13:46:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ppsw-41.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-41.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.141]) (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 811943A0992 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 13:46:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://help.uis.cam.ac.uk/email-scanner-virus
Received: from grey.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.57.57]:38970) by ppsw-41.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.139]:25) with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) id 1kf8nX-000NrP-Qy (Exim 4.92.3) (return-path <dot@dotat.at>); Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:45:59 +0000
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:45:59 +0000
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
To: Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com>
cc: "dnsop@ietf.org WG" <dnsop@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAH1iCirk5X9xOFmABQU9X9G92eQrePPuOwgXVHd4zza4kK9SwA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011172127200.9850@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <CAH1iCirk5X9xOFmABQU9X9G92eQrePPuOwgXVHd4zza4kK9SwA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/iT-m9vUV_J9jSVQfb7ek_4zb3zg>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] private-use in-meeting chat comments
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 17 Nov 2020 21:46:07 -0000

Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:

> One potential approach is to say (in the RFC) that one of the two-letter
> reserved codes should avoid name collision by putting a collision-resistant
> second-level label, below .zz and above the private use usage (and use that
> particular two-letter code in that manner exclusively).

This kind of thing, or guidspace.arpa, is not that different in terms of
usability / ugliness from assigning a unique subdomain under a domain that
has been registered in the normal way.

There's also a privacy leak: if you assign a unique subdomain then when a
device roams and leaks queries for the private domain, the device can be
tracked and correlated with other devices that use the same private
domain.

I have a terrible mental conflict trying to weigh this privacy issue
against the horrible consequences of encouraging people to squat on
unassigned domains and use colliding hostnames. The privacy leak probably
needs to be fixed regardless, and if it is fixed then there would be a bit
less pressure in favour of unwise squatting.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
Biscay: Southerly 3 to 5, veering westerly 5 or 6 later in northwest.
Moderate, occasionally rough in northwest. Rain later. Good, occasionally
moderate.