Re: [sunset4] future of dnssec?

Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> Wed, 22 February 2017 16:19 UTC

Return-Path: <cb.list6@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B10B129A39 for <sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:19:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 NVT8lJ_cBpo1 for <sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:19:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wr0-x231.google.com (mail-wr0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 637681298AB for <sunset4@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:19:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wr0-x231.google.com with SMTP id 97so5530356wrb.0 for <sunset4@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:19:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/HS8IQqZRsw2RSkXArGIsfRTgmQiQhyhqXzSLaK+f/o=; b=WqiUedhsxzTFxfUJtKIVxgeP0k8rhRvvlgWjUdMouqeKGSaqxSXjrstIeEyrCRRdOZ tTPH/E+DHEg9SBKX2fHc7/REoped9zU5C7sRiEPUZOKKjmtbDHDX+Yi1ADDnEvnRojLN RidudbFtSzjmoIYrL7Kj1y9wqIuHew3QSIKHQ3kLakhxnNUgwG0m1loCu7UTXgLMav4z gym5mK9F3rROA5W7GDz7pzewwg7wlemWzOvrX6OUwgki1XRaWgwlSphe63ImfDtJi9zL +YZ8Jsz8cRP7l46uCYZgJNvxxivyfDRCdQQ0Le4rZPOJEwp5CiEi5wdmKMVraYkBDmAK udDw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/HS8IQqZRsw2RSkXArGIsfRTgmQiQhyhqXzSLaK+f/o=; b=Z27E2sudj2fpmxyMFzlBDQKRL3EvYkYYVoRmzds8XYUsdycdncPYet0azl1NJR1DVm dnJtWlqtttUSAPrVAcw5vNx1Kck6J1cw5xXUUH9gO58nWjW8BUTCyEeenYq+wBiis7ze sJJRqg0YhG0JJbqTgNOrOqDom7vapdLSaSAYMZEqaLYZA4y3AYavFB1Zbj3tua0YxAHP cOCMxOO9C/6dwJsIB0nxPeD3w/j3kFxEhoCSSko3mhc7J+NxrJNkvn+w8+8lcq4nqQH/ HYi56PhwMhBbZoeVjCWE3/rvyb8xi8m05z1Q2NfUQEYYoGWW9ynURWegu/yMsq815xoW gSJQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39meycyFKEA3HRPz1/FfzDL7qC1F4G4iikvXDOy0tDfQr9Vk5JNdwIcbIt/nmWvG2c+CfWzIEkZyckjVsA==
X-Received: by 10.223.141.148 with SMTP id o20mr24934539wrb.191.1487780391768; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:19:51 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21334D566F0@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <B5E8C545-55B9-4ECB-B0C8-C3EEFEECD320@fugue.com> <20170222143629.9E9C56454B08@rock.dv.isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20170222143629.9E9C56454B08@rock.dv.isc.org>
From: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:19:40 +0000
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGS9gF3AX_EXo8fbii-TYFhHa6CdUkxEQXjvOdQsXSxhrw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045f4faec156e8054920dd00"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sunset4/K4tQYzT53en5ogAVkIq8MOF2Poo>
Cc: "Heatley, Nick" <nick.heatley@ee.co.uk>, "sunset4@ietf.org" <sunset4@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sunset4] future of dnssec?
X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list <sunset4.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sunset4>, <mailto:sunset4-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sunset4/>
List-Post: <mailto:sunset4@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sunset4-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4>, <mailto:sunset4-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:19:55 -0000

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 6:36 AM Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:

>
> In message <B5E8C545-55B9-4ECB-B0C8-C3EEFEECD320@fugue.com>, Ted Lemon
> writes:
> >
> > Nick, the solution to this is to do DNS64 in the validator.   If the
> > validator is a stub resolver, do the DNS64 hack there.   AFAIK the
> > technology to support this already exists.
>
> DNS64 really should just be made historic.  It does not work with
> DNSSEC.  There has NEVER been a NEED for NAT64 or DNS64.  They
> provides NO BENEFIT over other methods.  Every proported benefit
> turns out not to exist.
>
> Go do the comparitive analysis.


>From a network with 10s of millions of nat64 users and zero dnssec, I
disagree and suggest dnssec move to historic since it is a ddos attack
vector and provides no privacy element and generally weak cryto ... also it
has caused many wide scale outages for networks that have elected to use
it.



>
> > > On Feb 22, 2017, at 7:23 AM, Heatley, Nick <nick.heatley@ee.co.uk>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Post exhaustion, the majority of cellular networks and some public wifi
> > networks will use DNS64.
> > > DNSSEC and DNS64 do not get along. DNSSEC for “A records only” is
> > broken.
> > > Is this the reason why all content must go v6?
> > > Or is the case for DNSSEC still questionable?
> > > Or do end hosts need to perform DNS64 so “DNSSEC for A records only”
> > can be intact?
> > >
> > > NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
> > > This email contains BT information, which may be privileged or
> > confidential. It's meant only for the individual(s) or entity named
> > above.
> > > If you're not the intended recipient, note that disclosing, copying,
> > distributing or using this information is prohibited.
> > > If you've received this email in error, please let me know immediately
> > on the email address above. Thank you.
> > >
> > > We monitor our email system, and may record your emails.
> > >
> > > EE Limited
> > > Registered office:Trident Place, Mosquito Way, Hatfield, Hertfordshire,
> > AL10 9BW
> > > Registered in England no: 02382161
> > >
> > > EE Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of:
> > >
> > > British Telecommunications plc
> > > Registered office: 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ
> > > Registered in England no: 1800000
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > sunset4 mailing list
> > > sunset4@ietf.org <mailto:sunset4@ietf.org>
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4
> > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4>
>
> --
> Mark Andrews, ISC
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> sunset4 mailing list
> sunset4@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4
>