Thank you for your comments Q: why do you think it is useful to complicate things with a EDNS0 flag ?
Olafur On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 8:47 PM, Richard Gibson <rgib...@dyn.com> wrote: > With full realization that this is coming very late in the game, we had a > great deal of internal conversation within Dyn about implementing > refuse-any, and came away unsatisfied with both the "subset" and "HINFO" > approaches—the latter because of reasons that have already been covered, > and the former for lacking in-band signaling of non-"conventional" > incompleteness to aid legitimate use. > > I believe there is sufficient cause to reserve a new OPT record EDNS > header flag bit > <http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters/dns-parameters.xhtml#dns-parameters-13> > for indicating "partial response" (as distinct from "truncation"). It will > be safely ignored by current clients, but convey the desired information to > those in the know. > > P.S. Our discussion also raised some more minor points: > > - Insisting that the HINFO OS field SHOULD be empty ("set to the null > string") seems a little too strong; there's room in it for (and value > from) a short explanation (e.g., cloudflare.com. 3789 IN HINFO "Please > stop asking for ANY" "See draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any"). I'd prefer > text like "The OS field of the HINFO RDATA SHOULD be short to minimize > the size of the response, and MAY be empty or MAY include a summarized > description of local policy." > - "Conventional [ANY] response" is used but not defined. > - "ANY does not mean ALL" is misleading—RFC 1035 > <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1035#section-3.2.3> is clear about > QTYPE=255 being "a request for *all* records" (emphasis mine). That > said, the proposed *response* behavior is consistent with that RFC. > > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 12:56 AM, <internet-dra...@ietf.org> wrote: > >> >> 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 of the >> IETF. >> >> Title : Providing Minimal-Sized Responses to DNS >> Queries that have QTYPE=ANY >> Authors : Joe Abley >> Olafur Gudmundsson >> Marek Majkowski >> Filename : draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any-04.txt >> Pages : 10 >> Date : 2017-02-08 >> >> Abstract: >> The Domain Name System (DNS) specifies a query type (QTYPE) "ANY". >> The operator of an authoritative DNS server might choose not to >> respond to such queries for reasons of local policy, motivated by >> security, performance or other reasons. >> >> The DNS specification does not include specific guidance for the >> behaviour of DNS servers or clients in this situation. This document >> aims to provide such guidance. >> >> >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any/ >> >> There's also a htmlized version available at: >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any-04 >> >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any-04 >> >> >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >> submission >> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> DNSOP mailing list >> DNSOP@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >> > > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
