Re: [Doh] assorted things

Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se> Tue, 05 June 2018 13:19 UTC

Return-Path: <daniel@haxx.se>
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 0DDD813100F for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 06:19:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 6DtGlJM1rIk9 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 06:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from giant.haxx.se (www.haxx.se [IPv6:2a00:1a28:1200:9::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63C7C13100D for <doh@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 06:19:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from giant.haxx.se (mail [127.0.0.1]) by giant.haxx.se (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-4) with ESMTPS id w55DJ7MG006331 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 5 Jun 2018 15:19:07 +0200
Received: from localhost (dast@localhost) by giant.haxx.se (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) with ESMTP id w55DJ6kj006326; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 15:19:07 +0200
X-Authentication-Warning: giant.haxx.se: dast owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 15:19:06 +0200 (CEST)
From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
X-X-Sender: dast@giant.haxx.se
To: bert hubert <bert.hubert@powerdns.com>
cc: doh@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <20180605123541.GB29047@server.ds9a.nl>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1806051512050.15294@tvnag.unkk.fr>
References: <20180605123541.GB29047@server.ds9a.nl>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
X-fromdanielhimself: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/doh/moxHN2VvMZONsAQoik4AS0zBo8U>
Subject: Re: [Doh] assorted things
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 13:19:15 -0000

On Tue, 5 Jun 2018, bert hubert wrote:

>   Some of these non-successful HTTP responses (e.g., redirects or
>   authentication failures) could mean that clients need to make new
>   requests to satisfy the original question.
>
> I would recommending teeth to this. Naive implementations may decide to not 
> follow 3xx codes. I would recommend making this explicit with a MUST. Also, 
> it may be worth it to explicitly say if authentication is in our out of 
> scope.

Isn't all of this basically just how HTTP works and offers? RFC 7231 section 
6.4 explains redirects just fine I think and HTTP authentication is certainly 
a part of HTTP and is explained in RFC7235.

> Here it is a bit uncertain if you'd ever prompt a user for a 
> username/password for doing DNS resolution.

To me that sounds more like a UI/program decision and not something we need to 
specify.

> In 6.3 "Server Push":
>   For HTTP server push ([RFC7540] Section 8.2) extra care must be taken to
>   ensure that the pushed URI is one that the client would have directed the
>   same query to if the client had initiated the request.
>
> This means an API server is free to send responses to DNS queries we haven't
> seen yet?  And should a client do something with that?

Yes, basically. See RFC 75450 section 8.2.

> Or can it ignore the pushed records?

A HTTP/2 client can always opt to either not ever accept pushed resources or 
deny them when offered.

-- 

  / daniel.haxx.se