IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc6598-rfc6303-01

Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> Wed, 20 August 2014 23:29 UTC

Return-Path: <jabley@hopcount.ca>
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 B05A21A01E4 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:29:16 -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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 59zYstNAk53p for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:29:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x233.google.com (mail-ie0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F19791A008C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:29:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f179.google.com with SMTP id rl12so3794281iec.10 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:29:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopcount.ca; s=google; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=iOPSAHtMXc18pPbpG8L0PquGRb/fQCIW4LeeaxUomlM=; b=daUvQuj6m4zsK9/dMWabIIp0IplOOuQpGn2cFZ6s7GDVhUTHYiIqfWAPCt+a22Qnk2 6p6C7tqUFfF/uZUQ/9/BcW31Qss1p8sFZZ0CVSd5b4up3HOiubuBlFbwE5b4BwsKl3jf 5X/TO0q8iJef+Rm2hI2IH8eNPz6rIeVVOZU04=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to; bh=iOPSAHtMXc18pPbpG8L0PquGRb/fQCIW4LeeaxUomlM=; b=Vd4zPnXKLm6hTOWwvjPMXbEz+vTOmoyqjR2HiUnHWuiJlLl7guq5EsQlFg6muUaL// 6OSsSQCq6YplI8QvQGOPxPRx/gClWoSxTTlnpxFmqKq/gHyjUlDqN8zNodwq8tY+JKaH vy1bS8i0AZyvMS4f7itEntt5hhv5+ILckgi+pfzAQmDwRWSvwtTOniktNxGbVtUny+HS gNIwsu/no+hDDhfhmANIO1hCWS8afAlMYmFqACUUPs1MPSn7PWMTxkF/Wz7zMKR6iUHC o6H9XQyhz58yeesxU0t3IMWAhF8H73BgSP8W5rMecvFqGI7sveM8Jy3crbVhCyEnZMqU xHLg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkQ704xHzpNF4o64iyOPrH7c0wjuZ4Jko7O5w8oVc09fG5UuYSyd9Ljzh7XgE3H0Xy/sqY7
X-Received: by 10.50.39.8 with SMTP id l8mr484832igk.13.1408577354369; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:29:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dh16.r1.hopcount.ca (dh16.r1.hopcount.ca. [199.212.90.16]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id d10sm16469919igl.13.2014.08.20.16.29.13 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:29:13 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
In-Reply-To: <20140820214845.70AEA1D1A20E@rock.dv.isc.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 19:29:12 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E4AD7D21-995C-46B1-813E-70CA0919F6CE@hopcount.ca>
References: <20140814001610.3124D1CC688D@rock.dv.isc.org> <86AC48C0-4DFF-4286-A9B1-2A6BE3D14BDC@hopcount.ca> <20140814160453.1C7931CCE03D@rock.dv.isc.org> <7EA38D42-3915-403E-AFE3-C0A8E4A391BF@hopcount.ca> <Prayer.1.3.5.1408201750020.12368@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk> <19AE3CB3-B108-42CB-BAE2-A2F1FBB55EF4@hopcount.ca> <20140820214845.70AEA1D1A20E@rock.dv.isc.org>
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/zeKQAYhTSNunswoLaYp1VTpHwhg
Cc: "cet1@cam.ac.uk Thompson" <cet1@cam.ac.uk>, dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc6598-rfc6303-01
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: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 23:29:16 -0000

On 20 Aug 2014, at 17:48, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:

> You will give answers that validate as bogus in the stub resolver.

This seems to be the crux of our differing world views.

> A validating stub resolver

Validating stub resolvers?

In my own personal taxonomy a stub resolver doesn't validate. Validation signalling is available from a validating resolver (e.g. using the AD bit, of which I am not a fan), and that resolver (validating or not) is where I was suggesting the locally-relevant data would be served.

(Note that I'm not saying that my own personal taxonomy is of any use to anybody apart from me; I'm just putting it out there by way of explanation of the current forehead wrinkles. I continue to think it would be good to have a common understanding of these overloaded terms.)

Anyway, I'm not arguing against the idea of making certain delegations verifiably insecure. I think any of us could write up an I-D with an IANA Considerations section that specified the correct behaviour, if we want to do this properly with a documentation trail. (Maybe the nice IANA DNS Operations people could be convinced to make the change anyway without or in advance of documentation, but I tend to think that documentation is good in general.)


Joe

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status