[v6ops] Re: [tsvwg] Carrying large DNS packets over UDP in IPv6 networks

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sun, 16 June 2024 20:03 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1563EC14F689; Sun, 16 Jun 2024 13:03:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b3CWcW3QLj-J; Sun, 16 Jun 2024 13:03:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x433.google.com (mail-pf1-x433.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::433]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B13BDC14F6A1; Sun, 16 Jun 2024 13:03:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x433.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-705ff14d159so330973b3a.1; Sun, 16 Jun 2024 13:03:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1718568214; x=1719173014; darn=ietf.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=V8voN2oJ1fZPG7WwDwCqrm/XW6DBEPnzR/d72AkL/Wc=; b=cTRCHsVp1MDPRIV1cIWpIp5vBY4B4RYa37fkq2gGaZbCDxXSMI4W/tEPMZNdyTa3l1 rDkD6OVY+VXXoneEJWF5LbRWHTk0OaZwWS2IBA2VHXtnWWuVnIxxyPGFJ3UvoMOk1PPX ZeOCP8giX/2LqEO1V4cw/YKLiCHf5DOS6Qm6dNun2Pvak/VL91P2qBNzdVWIBPkXhu1/ YFUQy1puKgOvE/kjFDDfcBdoeqqMixaOHRkAOBzWHI9UjAULqjCE12UyCFMW/7HkAzW7 0Sku8PZ+hiIohzRIhsoACNlC3GrqE/nI74sOlVuYlrjc7dD5KOt2mpT4NQGTAtddfeA4 rvdA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1718568214; x=1719173014; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=V8voN2oJ1fZPG7WwDwCqrm/XW6DBEPnzR/d72AkL/Wc=; b=flnZbuHXDQpSGZ4GEEB/h8iYQaZgGSrf0IiDCIEbzXBf3uGe9Z9yTcr96Bwfl+ls9k 3TfsEjfSUs+JiJ/n6ycD26BcgjGLTvICu22Jznl0M8t0RyQzS2/MdWKK+2yIxdKpEdXt HPCQejHkiPdD+lg9vGXTPavINL6/lNOez1eu1yLOwJ+q32cBuIYnoyWgS5flWUZCrMiA z1iu1ibJ/8HUpRZHmkfMDCsXdDxM2mGNR5PNzTe7b7xPA4OoH06DDHUWOWZh3848bQLw F3B/6Ht5OK0tYAKgDW4VWvTPN30t9aYjIkhOUWZiFMaG7/C/QQDJ7W4s0UuXVlmTqDpp v4YA==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVS8EdTuogjpzmE+D4Ltt+AtKEpIoEGPGMuYn+l2K1Mdew+bTOxUK7EaRQCxWOwhmmusYKxF+w3PHkvccYkB5O2+SOz77QhypnY3imTjNM=
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxSgua4b5ODK2fHKRRkEGmlIKzlWRW0xvmuSOduE4Mug3XnjLrn pg215+2YeX5Vtpggwkysql9EzKxmHT/9ZryCtM07r3cPhmZePZ9s
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGkg7eVhva+0R4iND182Z39NdjLs8y6AwwBFmLluyBb0NdF6QFm0lMtsVde8N4lJxcvq+8z6Q==
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:82d8:0:b0:705:9c4f:e0da with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-705d71cf6dfmr7588063b3a.32.1718568213958; Sun, 16 Jun 2024 13:03:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPV6:2404:4400:541d:a600:44b7:2c2e:2bc6:8707? ([2404:4400:541d:a600:44b7:2c2e:2bc6:8707]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d2e1a72fcca58-705ccb67b29sm6443586b3a.141.2024.06.16.13.03.30 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 16 Jun 2024 13:03:33 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <fd1db63a-b735-4906-9416-80a118be15dc@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 08:03:29 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
References: <E35DC12F-D1CE-4AE5-B155-612C639A348B@gmail.com> <DU2PR02MB10160CCA998D5A86B9F11F2C388C22@DU2PR02MB10160.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com> <CACL_3VGzQfn9Gp+Wvx6HDZt=Gbyurirgt8Sa3qah7TpNgLiQug@mail.gmail.com> <BAEBA468-9B3E-41ED-B609-1D0A9D4A0F6E@gmail.com> <Zm81hsg9-O6A3GCQ@Space.Net>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <Zm81hsg9-O6A3GCQ@Space.Net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID-Hash: GC67BJ7BV6RR6YIAEVMC2ZP37CSD3YU2
X-Message-ID-Hash: GC67BJ7BV6RR6YIAEVMC2ZP37CSD3YU2
X-MailFrom: brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-v6ops.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [v6ops] Re: [tsvwg] Carrying large DNS packets over UDP in IPv6 networks
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/r6U5dUrHeKpE9UdmDqYxZVwHWmU>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:v6ops-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:v6ops-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:v6ops-leave@ietf.org>

Gert,

On 17-Jun-24 06:57, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2024 at 09:07:44AM -0700, Bob Hinden wrote:
>> This document is aligned with the recommendation in [I-D.ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation], but focuses on DNS over IPv6, and also recommends and provides additional details on running DNS over TCP or QUIC.
> 
> I don't think a v6ops document should venture into DNS transport
> recommendations - especially as the question "TCP or QUIC" is, basically,
> independent of the underlying IP protocol (IPv4 fragments are not safe
> from eaten by intermediate grue).

 From Geoff's observations, I'm not sure that's true - that is, the best practice for DNS/IPv4 probably differs from the best practice for DNS/IPv6.

Also, whether the final document(s) come out of v6ops or dnsop (or even tsvwg) is secondary to whether they say the right things. Perhaps we could ask the various WG chairs to coordinate?

    Brian