Warren Kumari <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> If the NS records / labels were _ta.a.iana-servers.net and _
> ta.b.iana-servers.net, that could be used as a positive signal that the
> resolver (or if the underscore freaks people out,
> dns-o-tls.a.iana-servers.net) is listening on 853 and that an inability
> to connect is a security issue.

Several people seem to quite like this kind of idea, and I think it's a
good way to reduce latency (since we have to assume that better glue
isn't an option). e.g. Willem and Andreas in
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dns-privacy/current/msg02137.html

Regarding the specifics, NS targets are hostnames so they have to conform
to RFC 952 syntax (no underscores).

I think signalling in the hostname has to be a hint rather than an
assertion, since it's vulnerable to a downgrade attack because delegation
NS records are unsigned (as Robert pointed out).

Putting the hint in the NS name I think makes the TA bit redundant - it's
really too late to be helpful.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <[email protected]>  http://dotat.at/
Southeast Fitzroy: Southwesterly 5 to 7. Slight or moderate becoming rough or
very rough. Mainly fair. Good, occasionally poor.

_______________________________________________
dns-privacy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy

Reply via email to