IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Call for Adoption: draft-song-dns-wireformat-http

Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 03 August 2016 12:19 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E83A12DB16 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Aug 2016 05:19:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.308
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.308 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 rPUOZ0MUvM8i for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Aug 2016 05:19:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AD3412DB13 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Aug 2016 05:19:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1bUv4e-0005d7-UG for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 12:15:00 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2016 12:15:00 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1bUv4e-0005d7-UG@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>) id 1bUv4Z-0005cQ-93 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 12:14:55 +0000
Received: from mail-io0-f178.google.com ([209.85.223.178]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>) id 1bUv4X-0003UX-Fo for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 12:14:54 +0000
Received: by mail-io0-f178.google.com with SMTP id q83so241553725iod.1 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 05:14:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=S569XQjbC2kCwwZzf2gNAXifDuMxcrkQjf3VRBVQJkY=; b=Cq+NK4ZPBcIwI7iUp47XOO874Bh7D6L0ZUicWFq5H5qDCfPxyFTPtBKWqmRSLKDseu P33//l658hqBRjmO+9+Y/rkpABS9jiu+/up7b41m++3VU2fx1Qg5j0ki5N4xrOgBaOI1 X4egzR1k7ngZoGHoU1N29kwzvMnzcfwHGNQxfj79jbtfqQDnindMvllekkSZxFzcW22f dOygjKqHgiYYRVR9plxKvApky7IIxtVSUsWfTQJgVq4bntS3xn/2gcdBRJ+sNN+37ggW SPu6/ZM0es/9fsw7wBdTkCqNbyRm4kB7Oglrcv36lddOitf9BQblIGBAfU3wcdAcAv33 iRTg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=S569XQjbC2kCwwZzf2gNAXifDuMxcrkQjf3VRBVQJkY=; b=P9RPDNXe9iblu3DEpylhu5GqfJM3Rx7tS0/6v5dD5XNYMNfbunB1RDlDpc2Bt06Uwm nG0L6IoJfE/3XCFyLmo/Jm5TMWYIO9aUS8KhAwK+TIEOnmw9m2YerOARMHRwAuDUo/QZ nSFrk/FYg15L4rOBn3CJBMb/01C5+QRC1QPi1lQbt8n3oBs33yRnpYfMZJ8C4zNa5rak g+Z/guM6uEM4Lek11v1X2kOq4Ruj/ekL5w1NPgK5FkZCaBe7gT5U/h0XsrfR3Wp479k4 Wdfpp3t3jp4Wfui0f6Iu7/GhMxDZ8o0ktzLgxfL8Hmhs4Gwol7XXkem7Or+XaI0lawsn d33w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoousddhR/B7Iya7FM2CpfO7fkOYqkwJmmMRkmwgabdjJeZysp6ncjkMucyX9NZuhsJQ==
X-Received: by 10.107.32.85 with SMTP id g82mr65383693iog.125.1470222681223; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 04:11:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from still.local (184-14-200-84.dr03.chtn.wv.frontiernet.net. [184.14.200.84]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id z128sm3326037iof.4.2016.08.03.04.11.20 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 03 Aug 2016 04:11:20 -0700 (PDT)
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
References: <e5c97630-a11f-0c93-8f4b-482764c85f71@gmail.com> <CADyWQ+FntHwanR551XtUtMQ4iw4m9RA4_0SK5zg6qvSHDs5EEw@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUSQEnqFKpZPPMOyhkeQzuwdpOspiKUpbWPYCwnfQ4hCA@mail.gmail.com> <0BABA5DA-76A7-4AAF-94B2-9007A44D21C8@mnot.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
From: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <a76832d9-ab57-f1aa-9a84-d6ddb49171ce@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2016 07:11:17 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:50.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/50.0a2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <0BABA5DA-76A7-4AAF-94B2-9007A44D21C8@mnot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.223.178; envelope-from=tjw.ietf@gmail.com; helo=mail-io0-f178.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.572, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1bUv4X-0003UX-Fo c46ab5e7292e58b27a0932f9a5630b35
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Call for Adoption: draft-song-dns-wireformat-http
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/a76832d9-ab57-f1aa-9a84-d6ddb49171ce@gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32169
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>


On 8/3/16 7:09 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
>> On 3 Aug 2016, at 2:39 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> It would be really awesome if someone could summarize the reasons that
>> the alternative proposals (those cited in the doc) were not adopted.
>> I see a few red flags in the doc:
>>
>> "The protocol is intended to serve as a sort of DNS VPN" -- there's a
>> long history of abuse of HTTP of exactly this form; probably because
>> it's easier.  See the above question regarding potentially better
>> alternatives.
>
> +1.
>
> Would DNSOP consider alternative approaches if they were submitted soonish, or are you committed to using this document as a starting point?
>

Alternative Approaches are always welcome.

tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email