Re: [DNSOP] Future of "Using DNAME in the DNS root zone for sinking of special-use TLDs" ?

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 18 October 2016 22:38 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 6CF8E1294EF for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 15:38:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=H5o01RxH; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=ErVb4vpi
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 v0NU3YdzqNiQ for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 15:38:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FD7C1294B7 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 15:38:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 41367 invoked from network); 18 Oct 2016 22:38:47 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=a196.5806a477.k1610; bh=AeJfDWl01N+F3XHpW1vB48Pq9Na7hKU7LdOygeGEoLc=; b=H5o01RxHFf5MynRfL3sDnN+15xwd/7SVJ38/WqZGyLgZojngn6J3tDJ0r6P/OHIAKmOTvujK/OdI5lMZZ8ozgBblow7qEQ6P60NWDkJpwp1wd73LLu3yRZyzs1K/Z6S8ov05dcUZ+/5XN/Qa+b2ZvgasvMzwkYP0roFoGDwNxJMBuaSiQIAJP1s7rfkEbD5GAFsUBWBNx7k2T3vChDbpVUPgpWxwSGrMgOternChhxeVHNenUbifgHCURptkDrI+
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=a196.5806a477.k1610; bh=AeJfDWl01N+F3XHpW1vB48Pq9Na7hKU7LdOygeGEoLc=; b=ErVb4vpi/5UoB4dkZ2bU5wvoeJCOytHfxrl2nodWqdzM1A8YEHpNZs8+35B0XJkmutWs9frt8EkwbfgOnHvJ6s14T8MrNOOea9CmuhCuB2NS4iF8hxa7huO4U2tPPeFLyCfLegP+Jo69vvTdqUPgoUfBKEleATzzb7znKDk7idlJFcDSmm6Ck1cXQB6sm32Vyv4CqWvRwoPaUlHWaRlS5BcQROKzmZ0an17GbhE+oCs6EmJwpTE1r7kbS+9KQaZI
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.0/X.509/SHA1) via TCP6; 18 Oct 2016 22:38:47 -0000
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 18:38:47 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.11.1610181836450.35412@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20161018220716.2A18956F019C@rock.dv.isc.org>
References: <20161018175340.26608.qmail@ary.lan> <20161018211145.0DA0456EF21C@rock.dv.isc.org> <alpine.OSX.2.11.1610181740070.35115@ary.qy> <20161018220716.2A18956F019C@rock.dv.isc.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (OSX 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/mT5LbUVOmffvrp9EU3ORNTaMOxU>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Future of "Using DNAME in the DNS root zone for sinking of special-use TLDs" ?
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: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 22:38:50 -0000

>>> No.  They slow the leaks.  They do not STOP the leaks.  They depend on
>>> leaks to work.
>>
>> With a 24 hour TTL on the root zone, it ain't going to leak very much.
>
> The practical TTL is 3 hours.

How come?  This is a real question, unbound appears to believe the 24 hour 
TTL.

> But dummy stub zones (which is what is being I'm requesting) require
> changes in the root zone to add a insecure delegation to not break
> other things.  That requires IANA to be instructed to do so.

Hm, I see your point.

R's,
John