Re: [Resolverless-dns] Paper on Resolver-less DNS

Paul Vixie <> Tue, 20 August 2019 07:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1035F1208C4 for <>; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:05:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IlPTwKZf5B2W for <>; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:05:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFFE11208EE for <>; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:05:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linux-9daj.localnet ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B4311892E8; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 07:05:05 +0000 (UTC)
From: Paul Vixie <>
Cc: John Levine <>,
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 07:04:50 +0000
Message-ID: <3636215.4jS6DqXcel@linux-9daj>
Organization: none
In-Reply-To: <20190819170749.5AEF588004D@ary.qy>
References: <20190819170749.5AEF588004D@ary.qy>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Resolverless-dns] Paper on Resolver-less DNS
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Resolverless DNS <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 07:05:11 -0000

On Monday, 19 August 2019 17:07:49 UTC John Levine wrote:
> In article <CAMOjQcFmqs-s19nd+i-> you write:
> >But that could still be very valuable.  If (and this is a big if) many
> >recursive resolvers use this mechanism to state whether or not they do
> >significant filtering, then for those that report that they do not, this
> >becomes a strong signal to clients that resolverless DNS will not bypass
> >any filtering.
> I'm scratching my head trying to figure out why I would want to
> configure my DNS resolver to tell random malware and PII stealing apps
> what my filtering policy is.

you mustn't, of course. but, anyone who is capable of asking your local RDNS a 
question should also be capable of finding out, reliably, that there _is_ 
policy, so that they can shut down any DoH or resolverless logic they may