IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lamps] Next steps on CAA

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 06 October 2017 21:04 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8389E13304A for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Oct 2017 14:04:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=fTst+MJ3; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=DFteVNzb
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 Z1aWWO6JUg2X for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Oct 2017 14:04:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 AA703132D89 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Oct 2017 14:04:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 10685 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2017 21:04:21 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=29b8.59d7efd5.k1710; bh=YKPq5F00k+KbTdzf+sflS2oB+nbplPtB5AEYhwnBNPc=; b=fTst+MJ3cikrCbzjmd+R2IhneEfb1Ha60KL+d4Ahuhzwz9ZrMrEmV8uOIy88LeCkZC1j4Im3ySFb7JnelENr5tWwyu6Eo3OzoLsZwsuF625408apf2jHLI3WVI4eAbvO9ZFrPlr0f/NLOuBqXBzjYn0bM5Ib3Ayx+0vdiIVYFjF9BYqZFbRGr4H3mDnPkVWuvCsa80coJiTz90E5QRyKmFxEfoPhbMJPy4JzOmHSZ+X7p0hOdtY9WpfFFwiR0QfC
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=29b8.59d7efd5.k1710; bh=YKPq5F00k+KbTdzf+sflS2oB+nbplPtB5AEYhwnBNPc=; b=DFteVNzbUHnZk/DjtCAPWbNeTMZ2xErO6J4FtLWgDAEPF0y2rKf1+PRhnJgvzTJOdc/ERfs00Svg1GnaDr6ipPFhXr4vrzZb2to28G7RAO7WAaddTlSDLfTwRrkjYCBuTQJD52SFzws/iDDV+O0aYIaoAxFPazV3mcyxuu7/BKQ+1cYrkBmBPkT35UccFz005ecw6MK/J6bHfaqVK/UgVrKZGI4tjcxXIJ8r9mGY9wCOGRetNhv16ELz999nn+eA
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2/X.509/AEAD) via TCP6; 06 Oct 2017 21:04:20 -0000
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2017 17:04:20 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1710061656080.33175@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Patrick Donahue <pat@cloudflare.com>
Cc: SPASM <spasm@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACh0qC+jRjPMsf7YmDqoKZ0X1zWE2p=fUAo5uN3bZwwzBRG9Kg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACh0qC+jRjPMsf7YmDqoKZ0X1zWE2p=fUAo5uN3bZwwzBRG9Kg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (OSX 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/zNLBu-iixIXD4jikSqTyzbJD4yU>
Subject: Re: [lamps] Next steps on CAA
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is a venue for discussion of doing Some Pkix And SMime \(spasm\) work." <spasm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spasm/>
List-Post: <mailto:spasm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2017 21:04:24 -0000

> I've provided a real-world counter example below that illustrates why
> climbing the CNAME tree ...

Oh, sorry, I misread some previous messages and misunderstood the problem. 
I agree, the domain owner needs to be able to publish CAA independent of 
where it might be hosted.

Since I am not a fan of tree climibing or of the PSL, here's my 
suggestion:

www.mysite.example. CNAME something.smogflare.example.   ; indirect to web host

1. first look for CAA here, works whether name is CNAME'd

_caa.www.mysite.example. CAA  128 issue "letsencrypt.org"

2. failing that look for it here, backward compatible

www.mysite.example. CAA  128 issue "letsencrypt.org"

3. Failing that, stop.

This doesn't deal with DNAMEs but I don't see any reasonable solution to 
DNAMEs since I don't see any reasonble way to construct a non-DNAME'd name 
from a DNAME'd one.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email