IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Quic: the elephant in the room

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Mon, 12 April 2021 15:54 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 6170F3A23BB for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 08:54:17 -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 OkOYLus1fmGM for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 08:54:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dog.birch.relay.mailchannels.net (dog.birch.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.209.48]) (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 78D3D3A239C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 08:54:12 -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 A445D21B0A; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 15:54:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a47.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-17-216.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.17.216]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 332CE21C8C; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 15:54:09 +0000 (UTC)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a47.g.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 100.96.17.216 (trex/6.1.1); Mon, 12 Apr 2021 15:54:09 +0000
X-MC-Relay: Neutral
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Name-Thread: 068484061a18233c_1618242849446_818212258
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1618242849445:1338110008
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1618242849445
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a47.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a47.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDA738ACCD; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 08:54:08 -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=P5vi9a4kMHUvV4 P2ZZztT8HQx5c=; b=v5d7WPEWXSu3TY18vGbxZcIlB8gUnukl88Nk5kNzerylzm 7FuHH9vyW1WVzCS5+97qO2r5giX5J5dmLtYO2AZ3Z1Ue3Z/A1cBwbCqe8UxdQQg+ LqALm/g0uPckQF3ZRC+Eoh8XVe+g5oEvW04p6jVpfwBnnopK035pfXGO2q7M0=
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-a47.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 213998ACCB; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 08:54:07 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 10:54:04 -0500
X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a47
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Quic: the elephant in the room
Message-ID: <20210412155404.GR9612@localhost>
References: <3b25c77d-e721-e86d-6c34-a90039aab0e2@mtcc.com> <CAMm+Lwhi8xwFgZJL7jod2g4urZt_f+dm0tNi+3y1osqOfch2mQ@mail.gmail.com> <3593a01f-73f4-7d03-a85b-dff64a8b070e@mtcc.com> <506A780B-9C0D-4F4A-B045-098F6152F4DB@akamai.com> <20210411195854.GL9612@localhost> <94707E61-D7D2-4494-B88C-E229C8D8F3E4@akamai.com> <20210412002634.GO9612@localhost> <31A7A397-747D-4099-A3A3-F845137022BD@akamai.com> <20210412021224.GP9612@localhost> <9F769BE5-B470-490E-9303-D3B0A494D20F@akamai.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <9F769BE5-B470-490E-9303-D3B0A494D20F@akamai.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/khBkIiWKnsj3J0NqMDa-ZkkizIw>
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: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 15:54:20 -0000

On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 12:54:20PM +0000, Salz, Rich wrote:
>     > Thanks for the explanation.  I don't know enough DNSSEC to know if
>     > that's actually deployable, but okay
> 
> >    You can tune down TTLs before the change, etc.
> 
> The TTL is already a small number of seconds so that in the standard
> DNS case, they can switch within five seconds.
> 
> Sounds to me that, as I thought, they will have to sign a TLSA record
> every five seconds.  No?

No.  TTL != notAfter.

You do not have to re-sign any RRs every N seconds just because their
TTL is N seconds.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email