Re: [DNSOP] Some thoughts on special-use names, from an application standpoint

Philip Homburg <pch-dnsop@u-1.phicoh.com> Sun, 29 November 2015 12:22 UTC

Return-Path: <pch-bBB316E3E@u-1.phicoh.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58A381ACD0D for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 04:22:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Quarantine-ID: <NltlQe7ZkgSL>
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER SECTION, Duplicate header field: "Cc"
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
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 NltlQe7ZkgSL for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 04:22:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (stereo6-he.hq.phicoh.net [IPv6:2001:470:d16a:10:2a0:c9ff:fe9f:17a9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B0C41ACD0B for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 04:22:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (localhost [::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by stereo.hq.phicoh.net with esmtp (Smail #91) id m1a30za-0000IuC; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 13:22:10 +0100
Message-Id: <m1a30za-0000IuC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
From: Philip Homburg <pch-dnsop@u-1.phicoh.com>
Sender: pch-bBB316E3E@u-1.phicoh.com
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 29 Nov 2015 21:11:31 +1100 ." <80FD8D43-1552-4E10-97CD-9781FED204F2@mnot.net>
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 13:22:08 +0100
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/mZ6PyPKMszelM89pkccP3v8ZMm4>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Some thoughts on special-use names, from an application standpoint
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 29 Nov 2015 12:22:16 -0000

>.onion was the chosen approach precisely because nothing else but lookup and s
>ubsequent routing has to change; there are no other application-level decision
>s about .onion, and that's a feature. HTTP still works, TLS still works (once 
>you can get a cert), links still work, HTML still works. Same-origin policy st
>ill works. 

Call me old-fashioned, but I think this is silly.

The purpose of the domain name system is to name things. We have IP
addresses and we want to refer to them using names. We do the same thing
with mail domains, etc.

In goes a name, out comes some lower level entity.

In this context an onion address should have been an 'IN ONION', i.e, 
www.example.com might have an 'IN ONION' address for use with TOR.

Now instead, .onion doesn't map to anything. In goes an onion address (and
not a name) out comes nothing. All, .onion does is signal a particular
transport protocol. 

So it is a clear abuse of the domain name system. It might be that it is the
best option. But my guess is that is was just the easiest hack to get it
working.