Re: [DNSOP] Fundamental ANAME problems

Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk> Sun, 04 November 2018 09:01 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 3A67E130DD5 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 01:01:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 fibSv_Lx1qXk for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 01:01:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hydrogen.portfast.net (hydrogen.portfast.net [188.246.200.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56970130E07 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 4 Nov 2018 01:01:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-80c8.meeting.ietf.org ([31.133.128.200]:51073) by hydrogen.portfast.net ([188.246.200.2]:465) with esmtpsa (fixed_plain:ray@bellis.me.uk) (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) id 1gJEHo-000748-Mo (Exim 4.72) for dnsop@ietf.org (return-path <ray@bellis.me.uk>); Sun, 04 Nov 2018 09:01:37 +0000
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <CAH1iCirXYsYB3sAo8f1Jy-q4meLmQAPSFO-7x5idDufdT_unXQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+nkc8C6yVT62cW5QP-ec2ZT7FY_n48Ecr=CLeE6FS_1duBO8g@mail.gmail.com> <CAJhMdTOwU88BkukodL_zXcK1=JenExX4HL46Zzbw=+btLbDG2A@mail.gmail.com> <20181103193258.GE20885@besserwisser.org> <3E93AE5D-C8AC-496E-85DB-57E6F8E92DF5@frobbit.se> <00158263-85dd-69ce-5299-13ff4c2411c5@bellis.me.uk> <5BDEA85E.409@redbarn.org>
From: Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>
Message-ID: <8d285205-f4c4-410a-7b8c-d8bee6832e4f@bellis.me.uk>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2018 16:01:34 +0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5BDEA85E.409@redbarn.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/mR13vmIj2q6pXFXgzBug4QNC10w>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Fundamental ANAME problems
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: Sun, 04 Nov 2018 09:01:42 -0000


On 04/11/2018 15:05, Paul Vixie wrote:

> as evidenced by RFC 8484, the web community seems to regret basing
> their work on the Internet System, and is now moving independently.
> this may mean that offering them something like "HTTP RR" which can't
> work better than SRV or URI already works, because they speciously
> refuse to embrace these working technologies, will buy you nothing.

Members of both communities had what I felt was a very productive side
meeting during the Montreal IETF, at which I also believe there was an
acceptance that both "sides" need to come together for a mutually
agreeable solution.

I don't think that either SRV or URI are usable for the primary use
case, i.e. allowing a domain owner to put a record at the apex of
their zone that points at the hostname of the web provider they want to
use.   I personally don't think that ANAME is a good solution either.

Hence my draft which I hope is a move towards that middle ground that we
can all work with.  I have already had positive feedback from some HTTP 
people, but antagonising them won't help.

Ray