IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-tcp-requirements-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk> Wed, 03 November 2021 12:32 UTC

Return-Path: <ray@bellis.me.uk>
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 18B973A13A2 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Nov 2021 05:32:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.229
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.229 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-3.33, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=portfast.net
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 xI3r8Q3vp7AF for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Nov 2021 05:31:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.portfast.net (mail.portfast.net [IPv6:2a03:9800:20:1::2]) (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 A55BB3A1399 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Nov 2021 05:31:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=portfast.net; s=dkim; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Cc: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=5G1//+3pZyhrFiuzZQnjOgd7j6vzRJCiBNakQkt34GE=; b=Rns7FV0cG/bdJk7jFRwUS2RBIX 4n2reNYP1e0HEh7ebHCNWeeLwAG63h5PjNEBROKmoUeeOTEWdWlcB7605XFvlUylTDBIDTOiQBMoL GjNsK1NDWGxDBYOxpl70KY24Vi6mXqgiI1GN67ZdYFMppC4W86DyszDlf1ReLhclR8bw=;
Received: from [216.213.168.24] (port=51041 helo=Rays-MacBook-Pro.local) by mail.portfast.net ([188.246.200.9]:465) with esmtpsa (fixed_plain:ray@bellis.me.uk) (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) id 1miFQj-00010M-FG (Exim 4.92) for dnsop@ietf.org (return-path <ray@bellis.me.uk>); Wed, 03 Nov 2021 12:31:49 +0000
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <163519932265.9299.10540555803853417218@ietfa.amsl.com> <AD0CE9D0-BF6B-49E4-98A3-FC7F3010843E@verisign.com> <BN1P110MB093928DC42042BAE008E28C3DC8B9@BN1P110MB0939.NAMP110.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
From: Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>
Message-ID: <b53e500d-cf73-dc1c-42b5-d71d2b0a0a33@bellis.me.uk>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2021 12:31:48 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BN1P110MB093928DC42042BAE008E28C3DC8B9@BN1P110MB0939.NAMP110.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/lA7zqUJ4XfkcyV5qU1neY6FOn1g>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-tcp-requirements-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
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: Wed, 03 Nov 2021 12:32:01 -0000


On 02/11/2021 20:00, Roman Danyliw wrote:

> I believe that if this draft is going to be the BCP to discuss DNS
> over TCP, all of the flavors of DNS over TCP need to be covered.

I disagree, strongly.

The properties of DNS over TCP are well understood, and DNS over TLS is
(to a first approximation) a simple TLS wrapper around that.

DoH is something, umm, else.

Ray

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email