Re: [Doh] meta qtypes

Miek Gieben <> Sun, 18 March 2018 19:08 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A18A8126D73 for <>; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 12:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kCrqzc93nitS for <>; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 12:08:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A69A8126BF3 for <>; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 12:08:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id s10so3604062wra.13 for <>; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 12:08:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=aGfBa2OHxkrZBj3LO3qAN+N6OH3qlWi1qnaw7BJB1dQ=; b=CX62ZVwswmKIkD/1AGd4to/zyPGqxwqnXC7GT/Uqe6+LZRq4Yh8mKdR2doo+hNPDR7 7ROAjlXTMpoucKiSKf1hJj2Z2iZMgIp0h1KcFWHAgU+lIMTbVjWXgNquOV9hUTn8t8qr 3wRT1FIOP7k0ZemApzfQEtjMmMke7qesC9rSDAAvPDMdD1O1/xLuYcIgC/mscvgJCn2k SiyWkHSclhk8hbHf9egXCCPAvywMVVYojSku1FFjWNK8vB9Sq/sVZ6MQaeG+dn7eGsX0 2DvEoxBANmRLOq6VDnlC95aqlj/JsRmLN031g2LFGClPaq4GdQlwNd0Ucp5NXplL9cTj Ta/Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=aGfBa2OHxkrZBj3LO3qAN+N6OH3qlWi1qnaw7BJB1dQ=; b=AibO6D3HoudePvDIAwh4YkuYg/2PMOeDJWt3dvHeBF4CZZ2n1bVbRcTtifS0pk73iH 8q1/cgdJljk88sJe3SSKsCTit40YIx1XZx4iA1O5IMXerHI91yTX3Ba2pXOZCXph7QcJ ACZTxGuXcdq+ugQ50MG+hqmwcVAt32EgrFSxW039UPpF4zT6vIau2PfO6dJkm2SDnK89 6l45+g66EqKVVS4CxghoXUwwvitRSnG76XJBb/TZL8mubEF2LmSS5UeYKWroM9AisDF+ CHgDgPPhBKbox6zapIrjxeem0+/FjBAe14PceFSOC/gHBb2wsuyn+xSKrEQuQi+yRWxk Lcbg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7EZF88HyIQuj5PuRZt1zRv6FGFa8axt1dx4cqtECmyIpOUQM4bW tpyEHl/IylN7OwtLxqn8TjG7qw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELux1Dtwm1jdENLZ1tmkDmTM0H88/0+P9ZiJY4LooMGy5j21uiYoiR28ACLotHYhwmI9g1jB5g==
X-Received: by with SMTP id b11mr6801964wra.55.1521400088472; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 12:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [2001:8b0:bf59:4c3f:f15c:8a16:a624:9ea3]) by with ESMTPSA id s26sm15682523wrb.10.2018. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Sun, 18 Mar 2018 12:08:06 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2018 19:08:04 +0000
From: Miek Gieben <>
To: Patrick McManus <>
Cc: DoH WG <>
Message-ID: <>
Mail-Followup-To: Patrick McManus <>, DoH WG <>
References: <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <>
User-Agent: Vim/Mutt/Linux
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Doh] meta qtypes
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Over HTTPS <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2018 19:08:13 -0000

[ Quoting <> in "Re: [Doh] meta qtypes..." ]
>Hi - DoH itself doesn't require axfr/etc anywhere that DNS would not (I'm
>not aware of whether it does or not) - the text is just meant to give the
>HTTP considerations when it does carry larger DNS responses such as that.
>WRT HTTP caching - section 4 of DoH talks about how HTTP freshness
>lifetimes should be set for DoH responses. Is there something different

This HTTP caching opens up a pretty big can of worms on what to set the cache
TTL to.

If we consider HTTP/2 *just* the transport than it should not be concerned with
caching (i.e. TCP doesn't cache).

If we do want to cache on this layer a server implementing DoH needs to inspect 
the DNS packet, it should (among other things), look for a SOA record to get a 
TTL or MINTTL, or get the minimum TTL of all the records in the message, or look 
for RRSIG expiration times and distill a minimum TTL from those.

I think this draft should say "MUST not cache these responses".


Miek Gieben