Re: [DNSOP] post-dispatch dispatching a draft...
Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Wed, 18 May 2022 02:50 UTC
Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
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 104FCC14F734 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2022 19:50:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kgP2uJ1dtmVh for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2022 19:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb30.google.com (mail-yb1-xb30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b30]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C910EC14F718 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 May 2022 19:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb30.google.com with SMTP id t26so1478062ybt.3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 May 2022 19:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari.net; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+DlEcEY+nIDce3wUHXmdjKokojjWbNoQVNEOWLMtO6k=; b=XkqOAYLSaVCk9G2uq+lh9RLJBA2W64j1MYAH5Lt0/zM3durBeJqQorlz0BL1aGLX2r aCQuQ0FnBw3K5fjDDJ6MAQXAKKQkjJIZFDOcuBD44Kg686rinZS1oWw1pyIlmPN1ohXh T1LYyD26XDh9NRyzIQju1RMkgaArfMUQWW+GynpRZ4NyvPYBv1fgYdXsmeSqpIdGr7Zu gqn0TwvphEvcvZkD1nmRz7E8reT67sUISNNzFf1YE4muevpMnpH0qQG9vuQOs0oO2Sih T1KcqsPkHSS6RFaS7Mrz394W+CGRCqQMMoToyh3n+HNwmwDTYsnwfHcaQ/dnvHUSjIxY oDag==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+DlEcEY+nIDce3wUHXmdjKokojjWbNoQVNEOWLMtO6k=; b=OkiHLWslDbZNV2HTyw31QauHe5pNDh4e02ajC0C5RMNrKYrxjbn8e0ObO5gomeTmOj q5I36Gdd73MfluOjZEmdbN+59I8Niygk9dVYP3fxazyq9OHik4wA8cI0U8pWPtOAoEOH nr7BqmDwg+G7JeuzodsDBAIoWShyVEZEsPFpqvAxZ8dJ6NV+FSRV6OUGW98Cu9sCxtsv qKiWR0SyhGFHLJ7TUf5bp4I7RNxexuHn9wlYEXVlQdupNMIoqiD7WPOg6Fv6zDHbu6To vvjYhn/uVQXpgCsmynAJR3RD4s/Y8pqRvzzkg0ih/WWGmgIB7W4/eum5w+dWYHu+bt4j cBLA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530zr6yhIGFY5WfzLYA/nHapGIG6DouLqpqh61uzDMOg/ts055lG lPGvGj5jBAgvrZZaj7dh3ZAKiRzJyBTEMDFnoY5zCG2aeyc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw0+9dt8rLzZBkKTNDOGN123jDSmTy4Hd+aShZIpF2gh2kLMJu5vqjl7ns3F6/F6VlH8i+YgHYN7up5kga6b7o=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:1501:b0:649:ff91:5409 with SMTP id q1-20020a056902150100b00649ff915409mr25988783ybu.278.1652842204989; Tue, 17 May 2022 19:50:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 649336022844 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 18 May 2022 05:50:03 +0300
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Superhuman-Draft-ID: draft0052536cb5c6d1b3
In-Reply-To: <83482f28-7510-1bf0-3c06-e41725cec8bc@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <83482f28-7510-1bf0-3c06-e41725cec8bc@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Mailer: Superhuman Desktop (2022-05-16T22:05:51Z)
X-Superhuman-ID: l3azk6ft.a0d70da9-b4aa-452c-bccd-66c38aeb385d
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 05:50:03 +0300
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iJ0a6KK2MmJFz7C--d1kkdN3xyXJ1zbGVd+j3uS3HS0Kw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007f9be905df40509c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/lsygyZZ7-whWNR8qmgy8INyL9dg>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] post-dispatch dispatching a draft...
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
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, 18 May 2022 02:50:11 -0000
On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 11:39 AM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie > wrote: > Hi all, > > At IETF 113 a draft of mine [1] was presented (slides [2]) at the dispatch > session. Part of the upshot there was to check with dnsop if people felt > asking for adoption here would be the right plan for this draft. > > The draft is concerned with (re-)publishing ECHConfigList values in > SVCB/HTTPS RRs as the keys for ECH are rotated, but in the context where > the ECH private key holder and the DNS publishing entities differ. As an > FYI, ECH interop servers operated by Cloudflare and by me rotate such keys > hourly so some new automation is needed for cases where one does not have > some kind of dynamic DNS API available. > <no hats, personal view only, objects in rear-view mirror may be closer than they appear, etc/> 'k, so about the only terms I recognize from the above are 'DNS' and 'RR' - the rest are deep TLS arcana…. to my mind that makes it seem much more like it should be adopted in something like TLS, with some input / review from DNSOP / HTTPBIS… W P.S: Yeah, yeah, ok, I also recognized the others, but my point is that the document is much more (to my mind) related to TLS and well-known URIs and similar, and that the DNS bit is much more secondary... > To be clear: my own opinion is that adopting this in dnsop would not be a > good plan, but that asking the TLS WG would be the right plan instead. That > said though, even if this were adopted by TLS, I think it'd benefit from > input from dnsop (and httpbis), once the adopted form of the draft had > taken would could be a near-final overall shape. And who knows, maybe I'm > wrong and this'd be better handled here. > > So - do people here consider it'd be useful to try for a call for adoption > for this in dnsop, or do you agree with me that doing that in the tls wg > would be better? > > Thanks, > S. > > PS: If it's useful and there's time I'd be fine with asking the above > again at the upcoming interim. > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-farrell-tls-wkesni/ > [2] > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/113/materials/slides-113-dispatch-a-well-known-url-for-publishing-echconfiglists-00 > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >
- [DNSOP] post-dispatch dispatching a draft... Stephen Farrell
- Re: [DNSOP] post-dispatch dispatching a draft... Warren Kumari
- Re: [DNSOP] post-dispatch dispatching a draft... Sean Turner