Sorry for not thinking of these earlier, not sure if they would add
anything or clarify anything or potentially protect resolvers from DOS
attacks:
- Maybe some text warning about queries with excessive numbers of
labels, and suggestions for limiting their impact? E.g. "If NUM_LABELS is
m
Dave Lawrence wrote:
>
> Could you please clarify explicitly what should happen in the case of
> encountering CNAMEs? Or DNAMEs?
I guess when I originally sketched a qname minimization algorithm
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/gAgGx9Zz6W0OfyRdJ0Rx7xxmHDg/
I intended that it wou
Thanks for the work on this, Stephane, Ralph, and Paul.
Could you please clarify explicitly what should happen in the case of
encountering CNAMEs? Or DNAMEs?
The way I read it, at least for CNAMEs, is that you just keep
prepending labels to the ANCESTOR name so encountering the CNAME is in
pract
On 23-10-2020 00:12, Tony Finch wrote:
> Ralph Dolmans wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for your feedback, appreciated!
>
> Thanks for the response!
>
> I thought of another thing:
>
> Some of the points in section 5 (on limiting the number of queries and the
> performance downsides) should be discussed
Ralph Dolmans wrote:
>
> Thanks for your feedback, appreciated!
Thanks for the response!
I thought of another thing:
Some of the points in section 5 (on limiting the number of queries and the
performance downsides) should be discussed in section 7 (security
considerations). In particular QNAME
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> Tony Finch wrote:
>
> > Section 3, algorithm step 5: what is a "hidden QTYPE"?
>
> The original QTYPE, which may be "hidden" by a substitution to another
> QTYPE (see section 2 "a QTYPE selected by the resolver to hide the
> original QTYPE"). This was not in RFC 7816
Hi Tony,
Thanks for your feedback, appreciated!
On 14-10-2020 20:15, Tony Finch wrote:
> A few questions and suggestions:
>
> Section 3, algorithm step 5: what is a "hidden QTYPE"?
The QTYPE in the incoming query. We made the text more consistent and
now always use "original QTYPE".
>
> Also
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 07:15:10PM +0100,
Tony Finch wrote
a message of 53 lines which said:
> Section 3, algorithm step 5: what is a "hidden QTYPE"?
The original QTYPE, which may be "hidden" by a substitution to another
QTYPE (see section 2 "a QTYPE selected by the resolver to hide the
origi
A few questions and suggestions:
Section 3, algorithm step 5: what is a "hidden QTYPE"?
Also step 5, a NOERROR answer can be positive or negative, so I think it
should be made clear that this is about a non-NXDOMAIN negative cache
entry. (RFC 2308 calls these "NODATA".)
Step 6, what is the "mini
Greetings again. We have not heard much recent input on the draft other than
"remove the parts about it being experimental". We have done that, reorganized
it to make it clear that QNAME minimisation is already well-deployed, and a few
other cleanups.
We think the document is read for WG Last C
10 matches
Mail list logo
