[DNSOP] Why no more meta-queries? (Was: More work for DNSOP :-)

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Mon, 09 March 2015 14:29 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ABF11A89A6 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 07:29:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.96
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.96 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, J_CHICKENPOX_54=0.6, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SZ4ZP3KROJm0 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 07:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24BC81A89B8 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 07:29:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost []) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 027FF28059C; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 15:29:15 +0100 (CET)
Received: from relay1.nic.fr (relay1.nic.fr []) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0851280538; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 15:29:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (unknown [IPv6:2001:67c:1348:7::86:133]) by relay1.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED9E14C0053; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 15:28:44 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 15:28:44 +0100
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Evan Hunt <each@isc.org>
Message-ID: <20150309142844.GA11602@nic.fr>
References: <20150306145217.GA8959@nic.fr> <54F9C29E.9040408@jive.com> <54F9F90D.1020806@redbarn.org> <54F9FCD3.7010204@jive.com> <54F9FDFA.2030405@redbarn.org> <F25411A6-2CBD-4A76-949C-6E236FA87863@isoc.org> <20150306205920.GA17567@isc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150306205920.GA17567@isc.org>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 8.0
X-Kernel: Linux 3.16.0-4-686-pae i686
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/pttFW8YGBn8XodEqhOR2JU6RcDQ>
Cc: Simon Perreault <sperreault@jive.com>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>, Dan York <york@isoc.org>, Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
Subject: [DNSOP] Why no more meta-queries? (Was: More work for DNSOP :-)
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 14:29:49 -0000

On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 08:59:20PM +0000,
 Evan Hunt <each@isc.org> wrote 
 a message of 28 lines which said:

> (As an aside: I've often wondered why the DNS doesn't have *more*
> meta-query types, less extensive than ANY, such as a single type
> covering A and AAAA.

Probably for the same reason that makes QTYPE=ANY queries very
difficult to understand for the beginner and counter-intuitive:
because it is hard to specify the semantics. Imagine there is an ADDR
meta-query covering A and AAAA. You send QTYPE=ADDR and you get only A
record(s). Can you be *sure* (and can you validate with DNSSEC) that
there was no AAAA? Think of the various cases, RD=0, RD=1, caches,
forwarders, etc.

Same question if IETF invents IPv12 and we have AAAAAAAA records. At
first, some servers will ignore them. What is the meaning of ADDR if
you do not know if the servers handle AAAAAAAA?