Re: [Doh] [Ext] a tad confused on response sizes

Dave Lawrence <tale@dd.org> Tue, 05 June 2018 17:46 UTC

Return-Path: <tale@dd.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 9B591131119 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 10:46:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 Xtzn8KYhwj70 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 10:46:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gro.dd.org (gro.dd.org [207.136.192.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87655131123 for <doh@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 10:46:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gro.dd.org (Postfix, from userid 102) id 8C12F23891; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 13:46:40 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <23318.52352.556862.424875@gro.dd.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 13:46:40 -0400
From: Dave Lawrence <tale@dd.org>
To: doh@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1806051710290.1809@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <20180605120510.GA29047@server.ds9a.nl> <CFEAAD6E-4F9D-4DB5-A362-21775D74F84A@icann.org> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1806051515510.1809@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <663E7B21-9107-4A2B-9DEB-E13475A4E5FF@icann.org> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1806051604150.1809@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <20180605152355.6tlbeqvt7luklwjl@nic.fr> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1806051710290.1809@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/doh/EtjSgorHMrSyCmDSC3NNioTiovo>
Subject: Re: [Doh] [Ext] a tad confused on response sizes
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, 05 Jun 2018 17:46:44 -0000

Tony Finch writes:
> RFC 1035 doesn't allow TC for TCP messages.

It doesn't?  By inference do you mean, only because it got mentioned
in section 4.2.1, UDP usage, and not in 4.2.2, TCP usage?  It's a bit
stronger statement to make that it isn't allowed, especially since
what you quoted from 4.1.1 is transport agnostic:

|       TC      TrunCation - specifies that this message was truncated
|               due to length greater than that permitted on the
|               transmission channel.