Re: [Doh] [Ext] Are we missing an architecture? (was Re: DNS Camel thoughts: TC and message size)

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org> Thu, 14 June 2018 19:39 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 5D98D130E8A for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 12:39:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 CQ2_CzOoraK8 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 12:39:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out.west.pexch112.icann.org (unknown [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 776EC130E88 for <doh@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 12:39:09 -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 15.0.1367.3; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 12:39:07 -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 15.00.1367.000; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 12:39:07 -0700
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
CC: DoH WG <doh@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Doh] [Ext] Are we missing an architecture? (was Re: DNS Camel thoughts: TC and message size)
Thread-Index: AQHUApbj6sr7HpgoCUqfpeUX7P+jQqRdpuYAgAFGhACAAAf3gIAAEfgAgAAGfgCAABRdgIAAEW+AgABrFoCAAAVKgIAAO6gAgABglACAAFcZAIAAAumAgAADcwCAAAEugA==
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 19:39:07 +0000
Message-ID: <602C852F-D988-4D3C-A959-E7A6EAE6AC3E@icann.org>
References: <1E183D79-5716-47E5-8604-A4F5DC7588C2@icann.org> <045241e6-6d9f-162c-6ae3-0b10d59d21de@bellis.me.uk> <6BB0D47F-2BA3-4D9A-A125-1D1E180B06E0@icann.org> <53c320bc-6ea0-21f4-c7a1-1da34bbdb38d@nic.cz> <CAHbrMsBoKE-pfz97ZDb9ReLKMedk2KJ7xLCw_MPmxVtqF7PcuA@mail.gmail.com> <20180613192030.GA2792@jurassic> <CAHbrMsACdaz13v=2jbpZq1RU-_CP36Cgz13iFFWVj8qrjQ0b=g@mail.gmail.com> <20180613205637.GA23215@jurassic> <CAOdDvNr0ob_zhMw1BT_h8n77ecx5vht8WJ7OiwwDPrj0Wxf8SA@mail.gmail.com> <20180614042217.GA25915@jurassic> <20180614044113.GA27115@jurassic> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1806140728270.30130@tvnag.unkk.fr> <74D48781-9F05-482C-ACB2-7AB027611489@sinodun.com> <40ac87db-dfdb-5305-338d-ff3afb8e159d@o2.pl> <F6CEE7B0-E0BF-4EF7-9BDD-4DA7B539A511@icann.org> <CAPt1N1kBEv-ACPiWKckMGrQFu=F=pTD-D6oByzktmQe76AZYZg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPt1N1kBEv-ACPiWKckMGrQFu=F=pTD-D6oByzktmQe76AZYZg@mail.gmail.com>
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: [192.0.32.234]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1E3E88C46A5D8640A3040353E64617A9@pexch112.icann.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/doh/ImreydFlIFe-fmrloei0vFL77HM>
Subject: Re: [Doh] [Ext] Are we missing an architecture? (was Re: DNS Camel thoughts: TC and message size)
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: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 19:39:11 -0000

On Jun 14, 2018, at 12:34 PM, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>; wrote:
> Paul, Mateusz, can you talk about the use case for using DHCP to discover DoH?   It's not at all clear to me.

An OS might want to offer protected DNS for its stub resolver. DNS-over-TLS is one obvious option, DOH might be another.

--Paul Hoffman