Re: [DNSOP] Some distinctions and a request - Have some class?

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Fri, 03 July 2015 14:01 UTC

Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
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 76AB31B3095 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jul 2015 07:01:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 Bq68gGM4mRHU for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jul 2015 07:01:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-f176.google.com (mail-ob0-f176.google.com [209.85.214.176]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B5C51B2FD8 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Jul 2015 07:01:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by obbop1 with SMTP id op1so69875170obb.2 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 03 Jul 2015 07:01:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=67OGXYogdAqmovsTiIXQ+ri5/WSut1QMTPp+L2g8VxQ=; b=eSXCGD2zLcnPqcqe2SFmkY81K8tZx4DIN98ByaPfK25kSRGNfIGtTj1TaqDvikHudA UZL0uXMuIUwbkdku9NZTD/RHrNe2Hbe/6LXZbn7gleFiWuuangzYVEP7nIfI4RHqdXUK wAp3AlO50B52OrP/PrnKOfGXd+FzhB3ztOVU6BmQt4S0L/YbuHMwAEZBI8hElrBIztD8 gsfLgGNx8DOrUO3cKHw78HJJztNu6FZqTvPlTtKv6VWoqRjqs7dAW6MHgUYuq4QY+A0c 6XYdrc1Pv/BKfyThYz2aUi3A68CRpmij1KtLLC5h64HE79iwTiZslZf7a5GbnziNBzeC Dv3w==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnitcAOuPA2of1Nv+1AWQAMfgdPSjbwG+GZ1Hd3ly9IIqnYHBm0xFruPa6OwIzyWEg9O7of
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.45.23 with SMTP id t23mr19022846oit.110.1435932065417; Fri, 03 Jul 2015 07:01:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.202.203.134 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Jul 2015 07:01:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <986E07DA-B174-4F81-BFB5-F5EAD46C506F@karoshi.com>
References: <6CB05D82CE245B4083BBF3B97E2ED470C27498@ait-pex01mbx01.win.dtu.dk> <D1BAA21E.CA2E%edward.lewis@icann.org> <6CB05D82CE245B4083BBF3B97E2ED470C2759F@ait-pex01mbx01.win.dtu.dk> <6CB05D82CE245B4083BBF3B97E2ED470C275B2@ait-pex01mbx01.win.dtu.dk> <E225C721-7279-4053-97A2-2D63A155DA14@karoshi.com> <6CB05D82CE245B4083BBF3B97E2ED470C27602@ait-pex01mbx01.win.dtu.dk> <88E49F4B-64BD-4832-BD02-D1A882874E92@karoshi.com> <20150702234423.GB23022@mycre.ws> <EBDBDD70-046F-4E31-BDAC-A619EECD4F13@karoshi.com> <20150703012146.GA29948@mycre.ws> <DC13E07F-2203-4FE9-A67F-B5851A54298F@karoshi.com> <986E07DA-B174-4F81-BFB5-F5EAD46C506F@karoshi.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2015 10:01:05 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iJMZzrCM24gaMJpDNTHbKwF20DeVX7UszCMZuUvGnLaXw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
To: manning <bmanning@karoshi.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/xV29x0IYwDvZDWRN6GMS0ClQoJU>
Cc: Robert Edmonds <edmonds@mycre.ws>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Some distinctions and a request - Have some class?
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: Fri, 03 Jul 2015 14:01:11 -0000

On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 9:43 AM, manning <bmanning@karoshi.com> wrote:
> Actually, there IS an escape method already defined.  We just don’t use it much these days.
> It’s called  “class”
>
> There is no reason these alternate namespaces should sit in the IN class.  they could/should be in their
> own class, like the old CHAOS protocols.   So  a class  “ONION” or “P2P” would work out very nicely.

Yup, but the problem is that people want to be able to enter the
alternate namespace names into existing applications (like browsers,
ssh, etc), just like a "normal" DNS name. They want to be able to
email links around (like https://facebookcorewwwi.onion/ ) and have
others click on them, etc.

There is no way that I know of to tell e.g Safari to look this up in a
different class... and, even if there were, they would *still* leak,
because people are lazy...

W

>
> After all it’s the Domain Name System.  (can comprehend names in multiple domains, not just the Internet)
>
> manning
> bmanning@karoshi.com
> PO Box 12317
> Marina del Rey, CA 90295
> 310.322.8102
>
>
>
> On 2July2015Thursday, at 20:56, manning <bmanning@karoshi.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 2July2015Thursday, at 18:21, Robert Edmonds <edmonds@mycre.ws> wrote:
>>
>>> manning wrote:
>>>>     There in lies the problem.  These systems have no way to disambiguate a local v. global scope.
>>>>        It seems like the obvious solution is to ensure that these nodes do NOT have global scope, i.e. No connection to the Internets
>>>>        and no way to attempt DNS resolution.   Or they need to ensure that DNS resolution occurs after every other “name lookup technology”
>>>>        which is not global in scope.
>>>
>>> I don't understand this point.  Since Onion hidden service names are
>>> based on hashes derived from public keys surely they're globally scoped
>>> (barring hash collisions)?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Robert Edmonds
>>
>> If they _are_ globally scoped,  what part of the local system decides which namespace to use, the ONION, the LOCAL, the P2P, the BIT, the BBSS, the DECnetV, the IXP, or the DNS…
>> where is search order determined?  Does first match in any namespace win?  What is the tiebreaker when there are label collisions between namespaces?
>>
>>
>> /bill
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop



-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf