Reading this thread made me worder if we should cover this analysis in the 
applicability draft or not. I have opened an issue regarding this 
(https://github.com/quicwg/ops-drafts/issues/428#issue-1064583264). 

BR
Zahed

On 2021-11-24, 21:29, "QUIC on behalf of Christian Huitema" 
<[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:


    On 11/24/2021 12:17 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:
    >
    >
    > Christian Huitema wrote on 2021-11-24 12:02:
    >> ...
    >>
    >> Note that port 853 is a bit of a special case. TCP port 853 was first 
    >> reserved for DNS over TLS. UDP port 853 was then reserved for DNS 
    >> over DTLS, which was defined in an experimental RFC. Turns out that 
    >> several years later we are not aware of any deployment of DNS over 
    >> DTLS. So we believe that having UDP port 853 for DNS over QUIC and 
    >> TCP port 853 for DNS over TLS would keep the nice symmetry that was 
    >> originally intended. 
    >
    > who is "we"?
    The DNS over QUIC draft authors. Sorry, I should have specified.
    >
    >> It would for example make management of firewalls easier, "port 853 
    >> is encrypted DNS for both UDP and TCP". The downside would the case 
    >> of servers trying to run both DNS over QUIC and DNS over DTLS. We 
    >> don't know any such server, but it is nice to have a fallback 
    >> mechanism in the unforeseen case of some server somewhere trying to 
    >> do that. The ability of multiplexing QUIC and DTLS on the same port 
    >> gives us that.
    >
    > i likewise think UDP/853 for both DoD and DoQ is fine.
    >
    > the reason for widespread lack of deployment of DoT (TCP/853) and DoD 
    > (UDP/853) is simply because the TLS (middleware) supply chain does not 
    > broadly know how to authenticate a server whose domain name is 
    > unknown. that is, all DNS has at the time it wishes to transmit some 
    > kinds of queries is an IP6/IP4 address. putting these into 
    > presentation form and comparing the certificate's common name with 
    > that converted string can be done, but the logic to do so is in the 
    > TLS library not the DNS server. so, deployment of DoD (DTLS, UDP/853) 
    > is "stuck" at the moment.

    Yes. In theory, practical solutions must exist. In practice, we need 
    practice...

    -- Christian Huitema

Reply via email to