IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] the same in old days, was making names the same NEED protocol changes?

Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk> Sun, 27 February 2011 18:32 UTC

Return-Path: <dnsext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF1E93A6A25; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:32:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E4D33A6A25 for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:32:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.307
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.307 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.292, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g2qySBM7qLLT for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:32:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.avalus.com (mail.avalus.com [89.16.176.221]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A3953A6A00 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:32:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.100.15] (87-194-71-186.bethere.co.uk [87.194.71.186]) by mail.avalus.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BC945C56062; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 18:33:03 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 18:33:02 +0000
From: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
To: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>, dnsext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <552AB7D12FAB50296E795CF5@Ximines.local>
In-Reply-To: <20110227182720.6537.qmail@joyce.lan>
References: <20110227182720.6537.qmail@joyce.lan>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Subject: Re: [dnsext] the same in old days, was making names the same NEED protocol changes?
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org

--On 27 February 2011 18:27:20 +0000 John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

> The primary shortcoming I see is a
> security issue: anyone can set a BNAME to make a random name
> equivalent to one of mine.

How does this differ from DNAME?

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email