Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was Re: Call for Adoption: draft-crocker-dns-attrleaf)
"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 01 March 2016 18:14 UTC
Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 14C411B3148 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 10:14:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.037
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.037 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 aV885HyclfwV for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 10:14:01 -0800 (PST)
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-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D548A1B313B for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 10:14:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 86240 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2016 18:13:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2016 18:13:55 -0000
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 18:13:32 -0000
Message-ID: <20160301181332.71478.qmail@ary.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwjJ0xe2wDW98JHJfV5jV3xTeuMNguU=rkqrZMzmei2iHA@mail.gmail.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/t_9j5RmIfbJYBuY7vWZH6si7Z3g>
Cc: phill@hallambaker.com
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was Re: Call for Adoption: draft-crocker-dns-attrleaf)
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: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 18:14:02 -0000
>So while SRV and NAPTR and the TXT records are stuck using the two >level approach, there is also a clear need for a meta-discovery record >that only uses the service prefix. Maybe. >Using SRV discovery you might use: > >_mmm._tcp.example.com SRV 1 10 80 host1.example.com >_mmm._tcp.example.com SRV 1 10 443 host2.example.com > >This is OK but its rather ugly. Does port 80 vs 443 entail the >implicit use of TLS? The practice to date has been to register separate service names for versions of a service that do implicit TLS, e.g., http and https, imap and imaps, pop3 and pop3s, sip and sips. This is a kludge but it's a well established kludge. Service names are cheap, so it's a cheap kludge. > If so what factors would determine the SSL trust anchor? RFC 6698 would tell you to look up the TLSA record at _443._tcp.example.com. (Note the port number rather than service name, specifically to handle TLS services on nonstandard ports.) In the absence of DANE you presumably use whatever trust anchor you use. R's, John
- [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-crocker-dns-attr… Tim Wicinski
- Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-crocker-dns-… Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-crocker-dns-… John Levine
- [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was Re:… Dave Crocker
- [DNSOP] comments ( was Re: Call for Adoption: dra… Dave Crocker
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… John R Levine
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… Ray Bellis
- Re: [DNSOP] comments ( was Re: Call for Adoption:… John Levine
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-crocker-dns-… Warren Kumari
- Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-crocker-dns-… joel jaeggli
- Re: [DNSOP] comments ( was Re: Call for Adoption:… Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… Dave Crocker
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… John Levine
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… Ray Bellis
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… John Levine
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… Ray Bellis
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… Dave Crocker
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… John R Levine
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… John Levine
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] old arguments unrelated to SRV-relate… John R Levine
- Re: [DNSOP] old arguments unrelated to SRV-relate… Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] old arguments unrelated to SRV-relate… Jared Mauch
- Re: [DNSOP] old arguments unrelated to SRV-relate… John R Levine
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [DNSOP] old arguments unrelated to SRV-relate… Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-crocker-dns-… Dave Crocker
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [DNSOP] SRV-related _underscore registry (was… Phillip Hallam-Baker