Re: [Doh] [Ext] A question on the mix of DNS and HTTP semantics

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Mon, 19 March 2018 15:40 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
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 3F15F12E051 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 08:40:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 RWZNcN70kIia for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 08:40:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ayla.bortzmeyer.org (ayla.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fe27:3d3f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FCC212E036 for <doh@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 08:40:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ayla.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id EC322A05BA; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 16:40:22 +0100 (CET)
Received: by godin (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E8624EC0BB8; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 16:39:58 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 15:39:58 +0000
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
Cc: doh@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20180319153958.GA24327@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
References: <CA+9kkMB7awRfW9jUmY9Q-1p+w3VLtpG5DxhF3s7Q58nEMZeX3w@mail.gmail.com> <20180318164307.GB6724@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <CAOdDvNr1GstB+g3pYi4w0bXuQ=Nz8HqgTRfWUX9TGu9YAYiz0w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMA733q3BPRbnN++0vwKrmOOCN8SBgknYwFaeEf2cvYikw@mail.gmail.com> <88AB1743-7270-4D72-8C70-0AB6B74416BD@icann.org> <SN1PR08MB1854485BF319264F51D208C3DAD40@SN1PR08MB1854.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <20180319150958.GA23411@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <20180319152126.c5ylchfawn4syfwb@mx4.yitter.info>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180319152126.c5ylchfawn4syfwb@mx4.yitter.info>
X-Transport: UUCP rules
X-Operating-System: Ubuntu 16.04 (xenial)
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/doh/wQ9Vao4SLuELZTVV1Xbmpu1uWAY>
Subject: Re: [Doh] [Ext] A question on the mix of DNS and HTTP semantics
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 15:40:32 -0000

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 11:21:27AM -0400,
 Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>; wrote 
 a message of 29 lines which said:

> If it were actually truncated, wouldn't the message have a TC bit
> set?

Truncated for HTTP reasons (error 500 : the server crashed), not for
DNS reasons.

If the DNS answer is truncated for DNS reasons (EDNS buffer size too
small), I would expect the HTTP status code to be 200.