Re: [Doh] [Ext] DNS64 and DOH

Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com> Mon, 19 March 2018 10:52 UTC

Return-Path: <bemasc@google.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 2B65D127522 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 03:52:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.009
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.009 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com
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 44Z6wYfFyCon for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 03:52:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x22b.google.com (mail-it0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A964126FDC for <doh@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 03:52:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id d13-v6so9851112itf.0 for <doh@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 03:52:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4jHfsvKnhjhLvq9bBpeeK4dPx04R3tamfQ6NMrxnZso=; b=HXZdPJl6hg8T6HUJCh6gpoRFmCxxhuSD6SFvzTcQkAsz++ZEf4yPALpjycjBYSy3wh 1Vt1HrFZ89Ckv7/OtphJ56du4i+47ka1nYW4wz3NIJmXaLn4x19oPRckEjf53N/wsFba +xP0Eb0LV2is5oiUYBkz9jsaKhoKreUqnXuXTwTyGUhY6gyHUsI7GUESy+5HcuOZNQ1w m13eWC/dassZ/gGAaQjP1Dt65LU3rDB8bYKc+EE8K6wjos6RUjnP1JF7WSUBah/2eHXv QMep7SM1bzOPh2OflbvfMD097BUJF30mHjj+o3UsU/uXKocud50nlrkLuSBhYqX63oJl 8EqQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4jHfsvKnhjhLvq9bBpeeK4dPx04R3tamfQ6NMrxnZso=; b=bq4ZOQ4k3kQzyOEVMV2PpAN762xhj6D2IMan/ET/VhRIPTL4wBEy/857etMDT7vLDe i3QsSlkPtmxQkPfgfsvmhfDGcAd/6HN1mclP8rPf+1DNAaTOIfdku+ofQBUdJ7q8ITZ2 wTKPe474h1HKiovltrrkQcYIz28S5bDitYYC2436nuF20CqhGCMcThL/FL0Cbw6+rMhv nhuxjryrWeLQbOq1CJCh0HUllcw3goSDY9BpKYzedOzygt2Pc9JJFkHxf3kpbgvHn45t VWLFHiqJE3mYJBO0pnYj9fIURuqikA1CgUpffOmLphLRzhvG3mtOFUNBhstVi5YITX/D +ZLg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7Fj/2swq6y6acv3uRd4uBp5todxaxzDM6r+0niA0XJGoOYAf8Dv nZyh2AfW5SA8wmzLuGZUF5LwqalwfBqxv/XKJ5zGkTzO
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELvgPH9Vi9TgEQaS1M/r9RSbDVZWgdVVGYOHjxpF4kDHZDiCfqlnPowiUmsLBah6zaCjAqNeGcQlM5+OzAYUEPw=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:a0cc:: with SMTP id o195-v6mr11328677ite.3.1521456720526; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 03:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.107.168.210 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 03:51:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20180319103315.zubfti6m4zoscas5@mx4.yitter.info>
References: <CAKC-DJjtHE89A=vG5iS_0M_jqnWusDUDnwyernd+FC1VxxmU5Q@mail.gmail.com> <C03FF16F-CA2A-40AD-9138-C0F089ADA832@icann.org> <20180319103315.zubfti6m4zoscas5@mx4.yitter.info>
From: Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 06:52:00 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHbrMsCtzLh+kUPui730=SX3WHRjwYvgQ_TZXC_im3BNaoOyHQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
Cc: DoH WG <doh@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="000000000000677bfe0567c1bf23"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/doh/v_Ra4ZD-eDp-dr_bHoZ2WW2L0qE>
Subject: Re: [Doh] [Ext] DNS64 and DOH
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: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 10:52:03 -0000

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 6:33 AM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 10:19:16AM +0000, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> >
> > This is true for DNS64 in any environment, not just DOH, correct? If a
> client has two resolvers configured and only one is doing DNS64, or they
> are doing it differently, you have the same problem, yes?
> >
>
> Quite so, but even in a MIF (split horizon) environment the
> different-scope resolution is not usually imagined to be two different
> paths to the whole Internet.  I think the point is basically that, if
> the host is doing DNS64 for resolution but somehow gets DOH that is
> not using the DNS64 path, there's a problem.  That does seem worth
> noting.
>

I am fine with a note on this topic, but I will observe that RFC 7858 (DNS
over TLS) feels no need to mention DNS64, so I think we are free to take a
similar approach here.


>
> A
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Doh mailing list
> Doh@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/doh
>