IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] draft-pauly-ipsecme-split-dns

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Wed, 20 June 2018 14:15 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64AAF1292AD; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 07:15:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 EqhUnrcvJ4xw; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 07:15:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:2a03:6000:1004:1::68]) (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 39F6D130EA5; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 07:15:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 419n1C672fz39Q; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 16:15:43 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1529504143; bh=AKJY2WO215ubZOxvbc3s3I/04VTciZ5O5nnqaj44WbM=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=Ag0KUFHk7oPJTd9pcl4Uz6St7+tiS6qlPCivIAqPQGj6itEMDcSmI9XZP8nmcF760 G1ZTOLhJcq2IbQl0nMRRmQK3ogIqms/JwSx/WLMuyR06/ib/lWxdoKlfeqbrHfnkCL GIgMFnBVESdETDke6R96E9AtCYwarEbrGubb2GzY=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s65qJz-fUd_1; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 16:15:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 16:15:42 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F10934FB768; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:15:41 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bofh.nohats.ca F10934FB768
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id E50F240D72BD; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:15:41 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:15:41 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
cc: IPsecME WG <ipsec@ietf.org>, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, "draft-ietf-ipsecme-split-dns.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ipsecme-split-dns.all@ietf.org>, "Waltermire, David A. (Fed)" <david.waltermire@nist.gov>, Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBPbq9ga8oSQ09GLyonPgZLOpFAy9hDJYAagUFz7GSHEoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1806201010490.6077@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1806181702230.13143@bofh.nohats.ca> <CABcZeBOa8qMhDyCMzPTAtUBZTYPGehrhPrr6h4cVCjP4QZ1+Ew@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1806191109300.16269@bofh.nohats.ca> <CABcZeBPFw1iuHXV+_sEuMaRCYRSk1nH_FujeimOb=ViEAtvkVA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1806191159310.26059@bofh.nohats.ca> <CABcZeBN2HwiwVzAUjyZU+Q+toFM2jOKHD9xmKwM1V5qhUoULEQ@mail.gmail.com> <20180619183459.GC4218@localhost> <CABcZeBPh33RMWy=pWVSWPp9cDrzrRrVQXgw1BKPLy_W0_Wrdgg@mail.gmail.com> <20180619224651.GD4218@localhost> <CABcZeBObub+rYYURt9SSumYqqWGxDMqhOG64oA+979n=mduXMw@mail.gmail.com> <20180619230148.GE4218@localhost> <CABcZeBNmavpZvzNRZBdOTKQYZ=yW=y2poaoVtsOeESNyRrG15Q@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1806200002340.18235@bofh.nohats.ca> <CABcZeBPbq9ga8oSQ09GLyonPgZLOpFAy9hDJYAagUFz7GSHEoQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LRH 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/sT_zIQ6-5PVfRPfba7NiVeO_8R4>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] draft-pauly-ipsecme-split-dns
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 14:15:46 -0000

On Tue, 19 Jun 2018, Eric Rescorla wrote:

> Yes, that's technically true, but the question is whether it's in fact
> practical for people to do that.

I already responded before that yes I think it is practical.

> I'm sorry to repeat myself, but once
> again the document clearly states that this can happen:

I also answered this question twice already. If you are waiting for a
trigger in any possibly answer, why not just tell us what that trigger
is and we can discuss it?

>    In most deployment scenario's, the IKE client has an expectation that
>    it is connecting, using a split-network setup, to a specific
>    organisation or enterprise.  A recommended policy would be to only
>    accept INTERNAL_DNSSEC_TA directives from that organization's DNS
>    names.  However, this might not be possible in all deployment
>    scenarios, such as one where the IKE server is handing out a number
>    of domains that are not within one parent domain.
> 
> Is that text wrong? If not, I suspect we're just quibbling about "common".

I can clarify the text if you tell me what is bothering you. Or you can
suggest text.

Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email