Re: [Doh] [DNSOP] Proposal for a side-meeting on services centralization at IETF 104 Prague

Ted Lemon <> Thu, 14 March 2019 00:48 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 081F4128B33 for <>; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 17:48:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kg4wraVRtz49 for <>; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 17:48:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::830]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E43231310F0 for <>; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 17:48:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id v10so4208528qtp.8 for <>; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 17:48:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=RQjW7PjnDDy0JmlSs51eBzDiMm6vhoFPMJvUWTCWswQ=; b=py/Pztu6iEanudNUZPO7zssHRilVXRDldD53XNzeDkZnNlDv9rNhRuG7mXDj0cDmP8 vEjh5cI9fJQqJHeQKI5GUO1RUxtktlPKMksadMB1+tI616wEBlF2szNqnjQTAYcuLAqY 68SANAi8gDcpFR8AK5A4Oe/EGCcOr1akAFGVzyl9IKJdbiSOX7NuJ6s0g8eRSbd8ViX/ 7pzTwa7PdISAZBKcuYyZsV3HeJtD1MRiNLTzCgFsoRapY6z8i1lNcxmecsWuKQth009f SWkdspjs991I6rqNKb6SGiVpUueCOBbsCtRdMIcSMREpN3zvf95t3UVZ4UTHesa1fLDH oL+w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=RQjW7PjnDDy0JmlSs51eBzDiMm6vhoFPMJvUWTCWswQ=; b=ad89Xn2CSRGPNMRPQ1wXfDYwLAPglC1XM5eLfGTOH3dEGeVkoocKjS/+4bZx04p6c6 VEWCqcswdAuw9SEk+2ppxAYqzrtNRA6ZODP7s4lu9s8gdMwgW93fR4bYBXxs2X07e2Sk pzziNq44VH0B79Nw3aPxfWSmgetzbAkW3XBFraeTnEjfxW6Ne8zS0jzhatBvOM2mz5x0 HIl3sIlNVx2fQv2Uq8fIXYrzlXp/5kdEVDwZPmwVUl25nsfN0Br2n8jpSoBsdBaprgpU pm7K743oTM1Cm1qY4ycHj57sa7FX4qwDZAhYtlPORKmiKZA0PdIQLaWVEHU6JM0unLak lcEg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWJa7A2UxLCFHd5Y8Y0R5me0oGiJRNvMECZDLEUGTJIC6nkPBhj 0TM4glXqkUmJmKKubgTNtHsaNw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzMVXZTlidocs+BUKb37qOP3kMD3aQLYzWYs2GnVawuWKXibcfrjKtp57fR3OR0leJzaZ5+1g==
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:d20d:: with SMTP id m13mr3188743qvh.165.1552524536018; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 17:48:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id n1sm7927068qkd.28.2019. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 13 Mar 2019 17:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ted Lemon <>
Message-Id: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_291E4122-A17D-40E5-99D4-F436A0582FAA"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.2\))
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 20:48:53 -0400
In-Reply-To: <2044747.4WdMZHU4Qz@linux-9daj>
Cc:, Vittorio Bertola <>,,,
To: Paul Vixie <>
References: <> <> <> <2044747.4WdMZHU4Qz@linux-9daj>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.2)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Doh] [DNSOP] Proposal for a side-meeting on services centralization at IETF 104 Prague
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Over HTTPS <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:48:59 -0000

On Mar 12, 2019, at 2:52 PM, Paul Vixie <> wrote:
> please do not relegate discussions about the loss of operator control over the 
> RDNS control plane

Although it’s certainly true that DNS is used as a control plane by many operators, there is no standard “RDNS control plane.”   If you think there should be, that’s something that the IETF could conceivably work on, but it’s not something that the DoH working group is obligated to treat as a standard use of DNS.   And I don’t think it’s a topic on which there is consensus in the IETF.

The problem with the discussion we’ve been having about DoH and how it affects your “RDNS control plane” is that we’re talking past each other, not that the discussion should be had elsewhere.   It’s fine for there to be a discussion, but if there is going to be a discussion, participants need to engage constructively, and not just fling slogans at each other.