Re: [ietf-smtp] why are we reinventing mta-sts ?

[Keith Moore <[e-mail]>]

On 10/8/19 7:34 AM, Tony Finch wrote:

> Keith Moore<[e-mail]>  wrote:
>
>> I was thinking more in terms of a new DNS RR type:
>>
>> example.com      DOTNS ns1.example.com
> There are interesting problems with using extra delegation records to
> bootstrap DoT:
>
> The DNS protocol has to have special logic for every RRtype that appears
> at a delegation, so you would need some kind of signalling to indicate
> that this is OK for all the parties involved. (I have not thought about
> the details of what would be required...)
I'm curious about this.   I thought all of the logic required was on the 
server end.
> You also need to upgrade EPP so that registrars can get the extra records
> into the registry database so that the registry can put them in the TLD.

Ah, that makes sense.

But I've been convinced for at least 20 years that the DNS protocol 
needed an upgrade path anyway, and that having new kinds of "NS" records 
was the only good way to do it.   So to me the effort required to add 
support for new delegation records seems like a necessary investment.

> And then wait an indefinite time for the registrars to upgrade their
> customer-facing interfaces so that you can tell them about the extra
> records.

Yes, this is a given.   One of the big problems with the 
registry-registrar model is that registrars get too much latitude about 
their customer interfaces.

Keith