Hi George,
> I have a different perspective on this question Mark.
>
> Firstly, I find use of .magic as the extreme RHS of a name, to force
> special behaviour architecturally disqueting.
>
> I really do worry about what we think we're building when we encode this
> behaviour into name strings.
>.onion was the chosen approach precisely because nothing else but lookup and s
>ubsequent routing has to change; there are no other application-level decision
>s about .onion, and that's a feature. HTTP still works, TLS still works (once
>you can get a cert), links still work, HTML still works. S
On 11/29/15, Philip Homburg wrote:
>>.onion was the chosen approach precisely because nothing else but lookup
>> and s
>>ubsequent routing has to change; there are no other application-level
>> decision
>>s about .onion, and that's a feature. HTTP still works, TLS still works
>> (once
>>you can ge
>> The purpose of the domain name system is to name things. We have IP
>> addresses and we want to refer to them using names. We do the same thing
>> with mail domains, etc.
>
>That is not the sole purpose - we use DNS for keys, for time stamps,
>for data of all kinds.
In a well designed system, n
Hi,
On 11/29/15, Philip Homburg wrote:
>>> The purpose of the domain name system is to name things. We have IP
>>> addresses and we want to refer to them using names. We do the same thing
>>> with mail domains, etc.
>>
>>That is not the sole purpose - we use DNS for keys, for time stamps,
>>for d
On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 06:06:11AM -0800,
internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote
a message of 44 lines which said:
> Title : NXDOMAIN really means there is nothing underneath
> Authors : Stephane Bortzmeyer
> Shumon Huque
> Filename
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 05:39:04AM -0500,
Shumon Huque wrote
a message of 234 lines which said:
> > That was exactly my point, and in that sense I'd say "SHOULD
> > delete" is redundant (and possibly imposes unnecessary
> > restrictions on implementations).
>
>
> Yes, I agree. The current de
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations Working Group
of the IETF.
Title : DNS query name minimisation to improve privacy
Author : Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 06:52:34AM -0800,
internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote
a message of 36 lines which said:
> Title : DNS query name minimisation to improve privacy
> Filename: draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation-08.txt
...
> A diff from the previous version is a
On 11/16/2015 12:39 AM, Ray Bellis wrote:
>>From my previous recollection of this, ISTR there was a suggestion that
> your draft only directly register "single-label" names, but with "_tcp",
> "_udp" et al listed in the registry as a link to RFC 6335?
(oops. missed the need to respond to this.)
Mark,
> What is the actual harm, discounting aesthetics?
For one thing, names not supported by the underlying infrastructure will
_always_ leak.
In the bad old days, when an application got a string ending in .UUCP, .BITNET,
.CSNET, etc., it had to know that those strings had to be treated dif
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 11/29/15, Philip Homburg wrote:
>>
>> It is only later, at the application layer that the name is used
>> again.
>>
>> It is here that .onion goes one step further. Onion 'names' are
>> derived from public ke
Dear All,
Before writing a draft (since I have had some unused drafts so far and ...
do not want to repeat the same mistake...), I would like to know the opinion
of WG on the overview of an idea for the extension of DANE so that it can
be used for other use cases beyond Email and web, especially
Some feedback with respect to installed trust anchors is needed.
Whether this is the correct solution I'm not sure. It requires
updating all resolvers in the resolution path to both cache and
relay tags. The same can be achieved by encoding the tags into
qnames/qtypes without needing the entir
14 matches
Mail list logo
