IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Name ownership and LLMNR (Re: Last Call: 'Linklocal Multicast Name Resolution...)

Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com> Thu, 01 September 2005 13:38 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EApGf-00020X-87; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 09:38:13 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EApGc-0001zV-N3 for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 09:38:10 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA03677 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 09:38:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sequoia.muada.com ([83.149.65.1]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EApIa-0006q9-8z for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 09:40:12 -0400
Received: from [82.192.90.27] (alumange.muada.com [82.192.90.27]) (authenticated bits=0) by sequoia.muada.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j81Dc3nb059998 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 1 Sep 2005 15:38:03 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from iljitsch@muada.com)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0509011352580.13347@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <DAC3FCB50E31C54987CD10797DA511BA1096B57F@WIN-MSG-10.wingroup.win deploy.n tdev.microsoft.com> <p06230956bf3bd9a4992d@[17.202.35.52]> <431676B7.5040302@cs.utk.edu> <B2C6F40E0409805428ED7669@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126> <Pine.LNX.4.60.0509011352580.13347@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v734)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; delsp="yes"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <56C8C6CA-006A-4FB5-9EB5-7BE3817BF67B@muada.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 15:38:05 +0200
To: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.734)
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on sequoia.muada.com
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: IETF General Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Name ownership and LLMNR (Re: Last Call: 'Linklocal Multicast Name Resolution...)
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

On 1-sep-2005, at 15:14, Tony Finch wrote:

>> If I have a name that I'm certain I own (this box is, with high  
>> certainty, the
>> only one in the world named HALVESTR-W2K02.emea.cisco.com), LLMNR  
>> allows me to
>> assert that name on a LAN even when the DNS is not available, or  
>> when that
>> name is not currently asserted in the DNS.

> This kind of naming is not possible for ad-hoc networks without  
> Internet
> connectivity and without any domain name registration.

Apparently, LLMNR tries to remedy this situation by making it  
possible. However, the protocol doesn't address the issue of name  
ownership. We actually have protocols that assert name ownership more  
or less as a by product: x.509 and the like.

An LLMNR that requires responders to have an x.509 certificate for  
the name they're claiming to hold would at least solve this issue.  
Obviously such a protocol would be utterly useless in any kind of  
unmanaged environment where local lookups are most needed.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email