Re: DNSSEC architecture vs reality

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Tue, 13 April 2021 01:04 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 003E23A1991 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 18:04:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.118
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.118 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cryptonector.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 QXiWxMbFlN-J for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 18:04:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from beige.elm.relay.mailchannels.net (beige.elm.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.212.16]) (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 BDC1F3A198F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 18:04:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7D50362FDE; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 01:04:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-11-78.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.11.78]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 6FAA1362ED3; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 01:04:16 +0000 (UTC)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 100.96.11.78 (trex/6.1.1); Tue, 13 Apr 2021 01:04:18 +0000
X-MC-Relay: Neutral
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Occur-Abortive: 7709911c37b4a6d3_1618275858538_1014135719
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1618275858538:3853704424
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1618275858537
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 182137E5F6; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 18:04:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=cryptonector.com; bh=rfU4nbQEKSv8XC sPPXntibZj58s=; b=nbiF+AXQrDEO+CjC+TpeXIcSJ8f8Ff0SN/LqTF7cpxDjcu 1qsCqkW+tIIa15hHUaFi4dWi4ZjY/+WKVQmLRjUhYysvd72DgDmC7T4p6RnrJ0Qi 8Bvdk9sTKRF2E6aInzD9eQopN7WjYw58YFfzJS4OTY90/tJEsC+9spi/kgeCk=
Received: from localhost (unknown [24.28.108.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B2F87E63F; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 18:04:14 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 20:04:12 -0500
X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a84
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: DNSSEC architecture vs reality
Message-ID: <20210413010411.GD9612@localhost>
References: <82c5fcc6-b419-6efb-b682-b5dbb32905e2@network-heretics.com> <585D8590-472B-4CBC-8292-5BE85521DD76@gmail.com> <a6545baf-b15e-3690-d7b5-be33c4078e02@mtcc.com> <20210412221435.GV9612@localhost> <0755b70e-cc8e-3404-73cd-51950b3d7e53@mtcc.com> <20210412222748.GW9612@localhost> <b0a43f25-c4c2-9f3c-1a42-426a6ef6afa0@mtcc.com> <5F7F84363A52E9AB79CBF9B2@PSB> <a6375223-6ff0-6ec6-dee6-1d5907bd8c65@network-heretics.com> <720a0610-78cf-1cb0-6b7f-b32cd23e96dc@mtcc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <720a0610-78cf-1cb0-6b7f-b32cd23e96dc@mtcc.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/ir9k1Wbyqn6S-T50j_JQgoCf6Wo>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 01:04:25 -0000

On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 05:50:53PM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
> The problem is that it's not this simple. Software needs to change to
> implement new RR types which inevitably begs the question "what's in it for
> me?"

Only presentation software needs to change at all, and that can always
have a fallback mode where RDATA are presented in hex and can be entered
in hex.  Yes, not user-friendly.  Maybe a little IETF-maintained, open
source library of JS for encoding/decoding RDATA of all RR types would
help.