Re: [Doh] [Ext] Proposal to close off these threads

Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com> Tue, 12 June 2018 17:23 UTC

Return-Path: <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
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 527A4130FA2 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 10:23:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.233
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.233 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 kqCHtNlPEH_0 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 10:23:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linode64.ducksong.com (linode6only.ducksong.com [IPv6:2600:3c02::f03c:91ff:fe6e:e8da]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8DF3130E06 for <doh@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 10:23:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot0-f171.google.com (mail-ot0-f171.google.com [74.125.82.171]) by linode64.ducksong.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1732B3A059 for <doh@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 13:23:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by mail-ot0-f171.google.com with SMTP id l15-v6so27977036oth.6 for <doh@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 10:23:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E14zVhCY17XtXWX6+jbRV/RZYwTd5C+XE2BL8Ga2bTQx2SWki3l j5YfdmaHoqGxsQsaUxNk5SDgkPe9phOS0yXCkyQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKJhaiJLbfRs6v6k5CzKLcATLIL4RlA6VgMdlkEEQuV2B/ODVzJqWd2eyAPbE/fi2DOVFpPrgM/KElt6W65soB4=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:419c:: with SMTP id p28-v6mr970155ote.2.1528824185799; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 10:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a4a:8a32:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 10:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1806121358580.916@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <1D917C05-2B74-4607-9EE2-55D367FF48B5@icann.org> <20180610220841.GB16671@server.ds9a.nl> <CAOdDvNrXpyGTFmMHcF6Vnegku0Zmiw_LFb1VKm1O2mFgB3aHEw@mail.gmail.com> <FB8DBC78-4584-4133-AF1F-E0483C28224D@icann.org> <CAOdDvNoYYVEGC0Zsyd1m8sayuzZoW186gb4gmMojZzvYy6=6rw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1806111648580.10764@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <CAOdDvNoQW0p1XpYPQ0kpxyPJ5hrtcQEBMw0qZFsP7_Kc3do4cQ@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1806121358580.916@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
From: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 10:23:05 -0700
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAOdDvNrE8eLf-3Tvn69obDhqktxWGVtVfXv=aFrTkq42Fzfi3w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAOdDvNrE8eLf-3Tvn69obDhqktxWGVtVfXv=aFrTkq42Fzfi3w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
Cc: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>, DoH WG <doh@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000084cb2f056e751edd"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/doh/DIOrPWp4_zfg-4UIq4BSgWEnkQE>
Subject: Re: [Doh] [Ext] Proposal to close off these threads
X-BeenThere: doh@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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, 12 Jun 2018 17:23:16 -0000

On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 6:31 AM, Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>; wrote:

>
> I don't think that is supported by the current draft text: it explicitly
> says that DNS errors should be returned as 200 OK application/dns-message
> responses, and there's no other defined media type that we're failing to
> negotiate.
>

we're more aligned that you think :)

DNS errors should indeed be 2xx responses (the draft doesn't specify the
media type, correctly)

I would just argue that the situation you are describing is a HTTP error,
not a DNS one. Let's assume a response that requires multiple messages -
you've got that information at the DNS layer, you just can't encode
transport it at the HTTP layer using a media type the client can
understand. So that's an http level failure.