Re: [Doh] [Ext] A question on the mix of DNS and HTTP semantics

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org> Tue, 20 March 2018 07:51 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
X-Original-To: doh@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: doh@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9541120724 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:51:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 zsn0bRBQwuqP for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:51:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out.west.pexch112.icann.org (pfe112-ca-1.pexch112.icann.org [64.78.40.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3D641201F2 for <doh@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:51:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:51:33 -0700
Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org ([64.78.40.21]) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG ([64.78.40.21]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:51:33 -0700
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
CC: "doh@ietf.org" <doh@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Doh] [Ext] A question on the mix of DNS and HTTP semantics
Thread-Index: AQHTv28QHeZwCg5oa0KiigaQhr0PcqPYHysAgAADNYCAAAUsAIAAbVQAgACiIAA=
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 07:51:33 +0000
Message-ID: <96D12257-F5CD-4A6A-8B2F-91FD440FE5B2@icann.org>
References: <CA+9kkMB7awRfW9jUmY9Q-1p+w3VLtpG5DxhF3s7Q58nEMZeX3w@mail.gmail.com> <20180318164307.GB6724@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <CAOdDvNr1GstB+g3pYi4w0bXuQ=Nz8HqgTRfWUX9TGu9YAYiz0w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMA733q3BPRbnN++0vwKrmOOCN8SBgknYwFaeEf2cvYikw@mail.gmail.com> <88AB1743-7270-4D72-8C70-0AB6B74416BD@icann.org> <SN1PR08MB1854485BF319264F51D208C3DAD40@SN1PR08MB1854.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <20180319150958.GA23411@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <20180319152126.c5ylchfawn4syfwb@mx4.yitter.info> <20180319153958.GA24327@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <20180319221116.2tooil7y64lv764q@mx4.yitter.info>
In-Reply-To: <20180319221116.2tooil7y64lv764q@mx4.yitter.info>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [192.0.47.234]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <CA673A6E5F697547B703AEAE1508A152@pexch112.icann.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/doh/8h2Sc32nGxknomURYz1ceFBY4tM>
Subject: Re: [Doh] [Ext] A question on the mix of DNS and HTTP semantics
X-BeenThere: doh@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Over HTTPS <doh.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/doh>, <mailto:doh-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/doh/>
List-Post: <mailto:doh@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:doh-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/doh>, <mailto:doh-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 07:51:36 -0000

On Mar 19, 2018, at 10:11 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>; wrote:
>> If the DNS answer is truncated for DNS reasons (EDNS buffer size too
>> small), I would expect the HTTP status code to be 200.
> 
> Also ok with me.  But since it's a wire message, you still need a TC
> bit set, right?  

Yes. The transport (in HTTPS, in TLS, in SomeFutureTransport) should not affect this.

--Paul Hoffman