From brian@innovationslab.net Fri Aug 23 07:21:56 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E96511E82F7 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 07:21:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JdcEHkXfFfaP for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 07:21:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uillean.fuaim.com (uillean.fuaim.com [206.197.161.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C79E11E82FF for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 07:21:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from clairseach.fuaim.com (clairseach-high.fuaim.com [206.197.161.158]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by uillean.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DF9D88117 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 07:21:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 10252537.rudm1.ra.johnshopkins.edu (unknown [162.129.250.14]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clairseach.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F13FD130003 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 07:21:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <52176FD7.6050802@innovationslab.net> Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 10:21:11 -0400 From: Brian Haberman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: IETF DNS Directorate Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [dns-dir] Review requested : draft-ietf-geopriv-res-gw-lis-discovery X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 14:21:56 -0000 All, Has anyone here reviewed this GEOPRIV document? https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-geopriv-res-gw-lis-discovery/ While it has all sorts of caveats on possible issues with this use case for DNS, I would like to have it sanity-checked by a couple of DNS experts. Volunteers? Regards, Brian From paf@frobbit.se Mon Aug 26 03:43:12 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dns-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7B1011E8184 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 03:43:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.3 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hc+E7fa2ajrI for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 03:43:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.frobbit.se (mail.frobbit.se [IPv6:2a02:80:3ffe::176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE2A711E8179 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 03:43:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1::9141:6d16:8775:9814] (unknown [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:0:9141:6d16:8775:9814]) by mail.frobbit.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 15C4025BD0; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 12:43:05 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= In-Reply-To: <52176FD7.6050802@innovationslab.net> Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 12:43:04 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4D27A788-DAB0-41E7-A374-A254E7BBED61@frobbit.se> References: <52176FD7.6050802@innovationslab.net> To: Brian Haberman X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) Cc: IETF DNS Directorate Subject: Re: [dns-dir] Review requested : draft-ietf-geopriv-res-gw-lis-discovery X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 10:43:12 -0000 On 23 aug 2013, at 16:21, Brian Haberman = wrote: > All, > Has anyone here reviewed this GEOPRIV document? >=20 > = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-geopriv-res-gw-lis-discovery/ >=20 > While it has all sorts of caveats on possible issues with this use = case for DNS, I would like to have it sanity-checked by a couple of DNS = experts. >=20 > Volunteers? I have checked this document and it is kind of,...ok, "works" but I = think there are a number of weaknesses: 1. It is very important DHCP method is used first (as is pointed out). 2. If DHCP is not populated, why would DNS be? Because DHCP is not = available maybe? 3. Use of NAPTR with selector inside the RDATA is something I do not = like...if they know the selector, I rather see use of URI resource = record where one can query for the prefixed URI directly (but people do = not know URI resource record exists). 4. For telephony "stuff" they already use NAPTR for all different kind = of weird stuff, so they should possibly continue to use NAPTR. 5. It is important these records are signed with DNSSEC. 6. I am nervous over the privacy aspects, and any try to tie IP address = to geo location is either wrong or interested to be used by the wrong = parties or both...but I understand this might be needed in this case. 7. I still think DHCP is much better, to query in a L2 broadcast method = for "the closest 'thing'", can not mdns be used instead ;-) So, no errors per se... Patrik