IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] draft-mohan-dns-query-xml-00.txt

Colm MacCárthaigh <colm@allcosts.net> Sat, 01 October 2011 15:00 UTC

Return-Path: <dnsext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A983421F961F; Sat, 1 Oct 2011 08:00:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1317481239; bh=tuP5Q21Swa59lXZhBqwmM3YpNhBIqEGyU5iLt0jwNFw=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:From:To: Subject:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help: List-Subscribe:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Sender; b=kBz6LjX8G0r/H6nGowQbxecOuPsxLdaMsA/PGBwB2WNO8l0Ohw7sSWVaQJ329NME3 7MsSy5EgCTWc2UcNsbbKS/i3EnCaGDPxEPyrEvw7w8eulzW0jAJuVQZefYyU1pe9yh oPsxFcHE5ICcryJAPuWIBdxFjXh3dntgUizKAOU0=
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 997E521F961F for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 1 Oct 2011 08:00:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.677
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5faNO1MBOIQX for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 1 Oct 2011 08:00:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1356D21F95FD for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Sat, 1 Oct 2011 08:00:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qadb12 with SMTP id b12so1151692qad.31 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Sat, 01 Oct 2011 08:03:33 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.224.217.73 with SMTP id hl9mr10275072qab.121.1317481413797; Sat, 01 Oct 2011 08:03:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.224.89.2 with HTTP; Sat, 1 Oct 2011 08:03:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201110010458.26859.vixie@isc.org>
References: <CACU5sDnBx5AijEgFXKNPjtcVdtBnBJamsn-f_ye0Jm3TQq0mvw@mail.gmail.com> <0394FB3B-6C2B-4D47-B1FA-AA54B7EB1053@kirei.se> <DDD7529C-9EF3-427F-AF90-2872CCD71ECF@cisco.com> <201110010458.26859.vixie@isc.org>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 11:03:33 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAF6GDcv=MgiKP2C7=bNEA4TxMNtELPo8sCoJDYSQGSnSZjUYA@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Colm_MacC=E1rthaigh?= <colm@allcosts.net>
To: dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-mohan-dns-query-xml-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org

On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 12:58 AM, Paul Vixie <vixie@isc.org> wrote:
> I like the binary format first proposed here by Edmonds.  I'm not as sure
> about Jakob's "use the accept headers to determine the format" idea since the
> only reason I wanted a printable format was so I could debug with "telnet".
> All clients, even those written in javascript, already know how to handle
> "plain old DNS wire format".  I truly do only expect this transport to be used
> when the normal UDP/53 and TCP/53 paths are middlebox-corrupted.

Printable formats for DNS payloads are also lossy and sacrifice
monotonicity. If a binary response is turned into, say, json and then
back again - the original points of label compression may be not be
the same. Since not all implementations compress equivalently, it's a
minor loss of information - probably only relevant to fingerprinting,
but still a loss.

-- 
Colm
_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email