> On 13 Mar 2024, at 03:46, John Levine <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> It appears that Paul Vixie  <[email protected]> said:
>> -=-=-=-=-=-
>> <<Rather than writing a draft for each limitation,
>> 
>> I think it would be better to compile them all into one draft.>>
> 
> I agree a draft describing the places where DNS evaluators
> should set limits would be a good idea.
> 
> I am considerably less enthusastic about specific limits, since
> the use of the DNS has evolved a lot and some things that may
> bave seemed excessive back in the day are now routine.
> 
> The obvious example is CNAME chains. In 1034/1035 the only use
> contemplated for CNAME was temporary forwarding when a host name
> changed, and for that use, chained CNAMEs made no sense. Now they
> delegate authority to different points of control in many different
> ways. For applications like CDNs, you need two or three link CNAME
> chains and nobody appears to find that a problem.

Actually it is a problem.  It results in lots of additional lookups.
That in turn results in amplification bug reports being reported from
universities looking for the latest way to abuse the DNS to launch
DoS attacks.  And it is not 3 CNAMEs, you are looking at 5+ CNAMEs
today.

From a recent pcap 

CNAME XXXXXXXX.Clump.YYYYYYYY.aa-rt.sharepoint.com., CNAME 
ZZZZZZZZZ.Farm.KKKKKKKK.aa-rt.sharepoint.com., CNAME 
LLLLLLLLL.Farm.BBBBBBBBBB.sharepointonline.com.akadns.net., CNAME 
AAAAAAA.farm.RRRRRRR.aa-rt.sharepoint.com.dual-spo-0005.spo-msedge.net., CNAME 
YYYYYYYY.spo-msedge.net

If you reduce the number of supported CNAMES you get “but it works with
Google” thrown back at you when in reality there isn’t a need for most
of this.  All of the CNAMES could be done in the background rather than
polluting caches with chains of CNAMES.

> R's,
> John
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742              INTERNET: [email protected]

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to