Re: [DNSOP] The Larger Discussion on Differences in Response Drafts

Matthew Pounsett <matt@conundrum.com> Wed, 17 August 2016 15:35 UTC

Return-Path: <matt@conundrum.com>
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 2EAE112D800 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:35:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.339
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.339 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_OBFUSCATE_05_10=0.26, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=conundrum-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 Mamhu5gOn2bp for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:35:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x22c.google.com (mail-qk0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A78E12DA61 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:35:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id l2so103505040qkf.3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:35:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=conundrum-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=JfOeXpIpbjWvoUKlQJ31iZjYZuqg1EWTlxY6szBXFEs=; b=TvZ0bqwZKXoarbWJXS15FESMz+IvfO10brC4s26LUez/VcbnkvErCVhyzq1aGFeVF3 tjjv2fxp1DNBVy/MuQSyL9qLvRKmNEHlJLI5T52wxd8NakuqabloHYdWWEHeZPOGG/0p hIjUtGS/AKi2iE4H9QoFJBD5/LmfSHH+//71hY+8s1HIRzVM+xukmXpVqgu0/+FCzzOb MR6V2cKC4BAVR2IVXvXnwRzliUACpOjW2stLBCcOG6KTOwRTNp3ij7fBBdvvGtoiOcvW K9ONk6E8EFoWNrpcP9y2LVCnb0BXdjjsu9e62L1xb6VIUqA7lRyVtOh2apDbL569VcKX JOxA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JfOeXpIpbjWvoUKlQJ31iZjYZuqg1EWTlxY6szBXFEs=; b=hkDvNskwdIaMZ+3OnnP4AlHnbgAOQo891z6vrROPwXj8y+fiwlq57m9wscgr8DPJt4 M2WOpgbn8qrGXVUXxSmSq452tYMGDf3N0JlIf9pAa7CeXOpdp1xBk3bA29mmcUXKKA61 b6IKAX0T8nOc7oQxvKfKWakW1WJfQj053S1Vd8hXHd17a8sFIF/s70ASmQ1tsmSAPVoG 7UVpmXEaLV057y/E8uwEbuIRqHO2lHKX+Tgzq+4JP0Io4lHG1tcAlCq6Omlv/d9Et7Cd 5oTEPR58IZPHkBvYq85nnRATb+BWr6a7JfMWLYWaeTaQ83q3vQN2v6Hyqs5zjxty/VB3 uujA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouuArmybwvD5AhVLMN6kiDqj4YMfW3D8GtmU8WsrO2K6YdEJjNQSftjktYJJ2VR8ZBL3jK6zjw/TKr0Biw==
X-Received: by 10.55.111.195 with SMTP id k186mr20517794qkc.89.1471448139776; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:35:39 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.237.46.194 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:35:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [216.235.10.37]
In-Reply-To: <665d8bd3-4229-eb98-1688-2460dcb943b6@gmail.com>
References: <665d8bd3-4229-eb98-1688-2460dcb943b6@gmail.com>
From: Matthew Pounsett <matt@conundrum.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 11:35:39 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAiTEH--d3J7E0kib6WedXKeuQKYcofaVZra5vuh2qpt8RUSHQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c05dd16ada216053a463796"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/lwsl5n1eL8kjQVR2j_8dGZLUt7U>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] The Larger Discussion on Differences in Response Drafts
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 17 Aug 2016 15:35:43 -0000

On 16 August 2016 at 08:57, Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> All,
>
>
> In Berlin we had two presentations on different methods of returning
> multiple responses:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wkumari-dnsop-multiple-responses/
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes/
>
> and a presentation in Buenos Aires:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vavrusa-dnsop-aaaa-for-free/
>
> All of these documents are attempting to solve a larger problem in
> different ways.
> The end result is "Return Associated Answer" to the client.
>
> The question is starting to coalesce around these two premises:
>
> - Do we want to Server to PUSH any or all Associated Answers, or
>


- Do we want the Client to PULL any or all Associated Answers, or
>

There are times when the server side of the communication will know what
the client needs next, much the same as following a CNAME chain.  This
might include records included automatically, such as returning the A/AAAA
records from the RDATA of a SRV record.  It might also include records
added by local policy, whether that's from configuration or learned by
heuristics.  In the future that might include things like returning an HTTP
SRV record for the apex (and associated address records) when a 'www' label
is queried for.

There's a fair bit of overlap between the use cases for push and pull, but
I think more use cases are covered by push than pull.  It's possible that
the use cases for pull are a subset of the use cases for push.  I haven't
yet thought of any pull use cases that couldn't be covered by push.

I think there's some flexibility to be gained from implementers having both
tools available, but I think if we were to only pursue one it should be
push.  I think the fears of providing a DDoS tool can be  assuaged by
requiring the use of things like cookies, or session signalling as a
prerequisite.


>
> - Do we want the Status Quo?
>

The status quo works ... but I believe there are things to be gained by
moving forward.