IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Sun, 03 February 2013 20:10 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DE1421F8512 for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Feb 2013 12:10:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NbRj+NUE4aP3 for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Feb 2013 12:10:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1217E21F8510 for <mif@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Feb 2013 12:10:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 031022016D; Sun, 3 Feb 2013 15:16:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 4AB086376A; Sun, 3 Feb 2013 15:09:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29EF663765; Sun, 3 Feb 2013 15:09:58 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: mif <mif@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B63074747BB1E@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
References: <CAM+vMERak2vAoYFeSLRep2xjpm480qPjutyv4-tV=KtU0XO=fw@mail.gmail.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630747479BA9@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <CAM+vMETvE==qUZO2_rhyUB+=ChUR4a9CoTCF+q=gBL2cRA+0UA@mail.gmail.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B63074747BB1E@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.3; nmh 1.3-dev; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22)
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2013 15:09:58 -0500
Message-ID: <20162.1359922198@sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Cc: draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension <draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mif] DNS selection with HE-MIF
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <mif.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mif>
List-Post: <mailto:mif@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2013 20:10:58 -0000

>>>>> "Ted" == Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> writes:
    Ted> The second set of cases are cases where 

"where DNS is incorrectly used" 

    Ted> to operate a captive portal.  


The IETF needs to write a BCP on captive portals. Abusing DNS is never
the right answer due to DNSSEC, the MIF situation just makes that
obvious to more users.


-- 
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email