Re: [Doh] A question of trust (was Re: Draft -09 and WGLC #2)

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Wed, 30 May 2018 14:39 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.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 3E4E712D943 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 May 2018 07:39:12 -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, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=FGdj2joB; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=G4wtHY1H
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 aJDxKadgdUy3 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 May 2018 07:39:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.yitter.info (mx4.yitter.info [159.203.56.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9247612DA03 for <doh@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 May 2018 07:39:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id E988ABDEF9 for <doh@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 May 2018 14:38:36 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1527691116; bh=uK5gDy/qFfHHwHr5HmOGzJ41zNgOuQrVm95AL5uqCXo=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=FGdj2joBiOb+ueFLP7aq2FUOb6mNR/A4Xisg8fynyHIMwO8nDQey4feKA5D2eYXm3 io3c8Iz76+tMSnepQju77EkNdW9ykNAkq+APAOGuauKZzYuZH9bLGNr2ZGfPBrrXxr G7vAEgnU8c+ogZ6Hf1EzFS/bzhWoXSq5AC1FdUtc=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca
Received: from mx4.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx4.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q5inhZS_OA1I for <doh@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 May 2018 14:38:35 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 10:38:33 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1527691115; bh=uK5gDy/qFfHHwHr5HmOGzJ41zNgOuQrVm95AL5uqCXo=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=G4wtHY1HGpjLswSjtwXWxtW2lLQFQU01mXb/wnegn/7asr6bU4o3gRYB5Nmr9rOGY 7Dvr7v42yVlMSM6NBBkRrz7e1X++pJomIOYwp32DZZfICveN8o23Pdbi8g+RxizV/T l+pECyJ5UmvGN7/X7Hpt9utHt2legrw/fcxjiSN0=
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: doh@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20180530143833.GB3110@mx4.yitter.info>
References: <382ba525100a4561b086fe8b8b6527be@ustx2ex-dag1mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com> <603D7553-D1A9-4DCC-9E74-199059C56A9F@sinodun.com> <1daad94d-99c1-803a-f52c-1dd17adefb7a@o2.pl> <CAOdDvNrpLwF5jpn1YA4-HXsfGxVkdds+xHVd6Bxy0Ux+3nrcrA@mail.gmail.com> <CA9BEE64-9F16-4CCC-A1E0-4C7FD45C455C@icann.org> <20180528161043.GB12038@mx4.yitter.info> <CABkgnnV3kKFCzKLfPf_0WZh95jr2vEt652Rb4EozfqROCVsJdA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOdDvNrPU9WM3WgcX1AVF39D3bGdxCKgPAF_afhfv2Qt0pZR5g@mail.gmail.com> <DB7D40D6-455A-48DD-AB98-DF2CF0866222@sinodun.com> <CAOdDvNopKvs18jQizgyiAQq8UyB4GwdqyXfXPa+25pNrxWg8pA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAOdDvNopKvs18jQizgyiAQq8UyB4GwdqyXfXPa+25pNrxWg8pA@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/doh/bgMhWux5xmWgE5opiwit3nkstQs>
Subject: Re: [Doh] A question of trust (was Re: Draft -09 and WGLC #2)
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: Wed, 30 May 2018 14:39:13 -0000

Hi,

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 09:22:54PM -0400, Patrick McManus wrote:
>     I support only specifying direct configuration in this document but either
>     way making it more explicit.
> 
> 
> I would describe [in]direct (or not) as one aspect of discovery, and the
> working group has chosen to stay away from discovery in this document.

To people who are used to the model of, "I got my resolver from DHCP,"
a thing you get from DHCP is not obviously "discovery".  It's
(auto)configuration.  It's not hard to see how a hotspot portal is
going to extend that metaphor using DOH, and it is still not clear to
me that this text is saying, "Don't do that," though I think it might
be.  

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com