Re: [Driu] [DNSOP] Resolverless DNS Side Meeting in Montreal

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Tue, 10 July 2018 14:59 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Original-To: driu@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: driu@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30763130FCF; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 07:59:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 1bROqm8coot4; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 07:59:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (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 2AC81130FCD; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 07:59:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41Q5233w6dzDm5; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 16:59:07 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1531234747; bh=3/+32zpeEZ4nIxPZISHOvOY63QE9kAj2xJORSW0LWDk=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=DYHl77ahR6hvcHhlPlNCFNcvV0IoFhjGUo6rfBtfM6Uyc3W7f6C8gCkr2LIKHl8zA 31YR5O8N/DHHBYzPtDg50MnEviRXyP0ElpytTnwV8uOpEUWu2du1M5vmQ8N+cRHv8P jrsKZsTiUt8jTpgvtcjWn3uNDuFhugdhH8U9cl4w=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vL-UWlkEHvhP; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 16:59:06 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 16:59:06 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8717D39A6A8; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 10:59:05 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bofh.nohats.ca 8717D39A6A8
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8080541682B5; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 10:59:05 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 10:59:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Philip Homburg <pch-dnsop-3@u-1.phicoh.com>
cc: dnsop@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, DoH WG <doh@ietf.org>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, driu@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <m1fcoe5-0000GuC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1807101056140.5219@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <m1fcoe5-0000GuC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LRH 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/driu/V7H1BjsDD5UsxRtu6-Eklu92BjQ>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 08:06:32 -0700
Subject: Re: [Driu] [DNSOP] Resolverless DNS Side Meeting in Montreal
X-BeenThere: driu@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: "DNS Resolver Identification and Use \(DRIU\)." <driu.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/driu>, <mailto:driu-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/driu/>
List-Post: <mailto:driu@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:driu-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/driu>, <mailto:driu-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:59:15 -0000

On Tue, 10 Jul 2018, Philip Homburg wrote:

>> For example www.example.com pushes you a AAAA record for img1.example.com.
>> Should you use it? What if it is for img1.img-example.com ? Do the
>> relationship between these domains matter? What kind of relationship (i.e.
>> it could be a domain relationship, or in the context of a browser it might
>> be a first-party tab like relationship, etc..)? What are the implications
>> of poison? Trackers? Privacy of requests never made? Speed? Competitive
>> shenanigans or DoS attacks?
>>
>> This was out of scope for DoH.

I'm also confused about what the scope is. If you connect over TLS to a
site and it has links to other hostnames, I guess you trust it ? The
TLS/trust mechanism has really no other way of certifying the content
server over TLS, unless you want to object/webpage signing. Which is
impossible in today's dynamic web state.

> Are you trying to re-invent DNSSEC for people who don't want to deploy
> DNSSEC?

It seems more like an extension of the Public Suffix. Which domains can
make claims about other domains.

I'm not sure I see the connection with private DNS queries.

Paul