IETF111 ADD Adaptive DNS Discovery WG Session Agenda

About ADD

Materials, Charter, Documents

• ADD WG General Info
• ADD GitHub Repositories
• ADD Documents, Drafts and I-Ds

ADD Chairs & Area Director

• AD: Eric Vynke
• Chairs: Glenn Deen, David Lawrence

Session link, minutes, jabber

• Meetecho Link remote participation
• Meeting Minutes
• Meeting Chat

IETF 111 ADD Session Times

Add has a single 2hr session: Friday July 30, 12:00-14:00 PDT (UTC-7) 1900-2100 UTC

ADD Agenda 12:00-14:00 PDT Friday

Welcome

• 5 minutes
• NOTE WELL
• Scribe selection
• Agenda bashing

Drafts

Meeting Materials

• IETF 111 ADD Presentions Link

1. Discovery of Designated Resolvers (DDR)

• draft-ietf-add-ddr
• 10 minutes + 10 minutes Q&A

2. Analysis of DNS Forwarder Scenario Relative to DDR and DNR

• draft-stark-add-dns-forwarder-analysis
• 10 minutes + 20 minutes Q&A

3. DHCP and Router Advertisement Options for the Discovery of Network-designated Resolvers (DNR)

• draft-ietf-add-dnr
• 5 minutes + 5 minutes Q&A

4. Split-Horizon DNS Configuration

• draft-reddy-add-enterprise-split-dns
• 5 minutes + 5 minutes Q&A

5. Discovery of Encrypted DNS Resolvers: Deployment Considerations

• draft-boucadair-add-deployment-considerations
• 5 minutes + 10 minutes Q&A

Other Discussion Topics

6. Private IPs, DDR, and PR#11

• Slides: See PR11 ADD DNS and Forwarders slides by Ben Schwartz & Tommy Jensen
• DDR Pull Request PR11
• See ADD list Thread for background discussion
• 10 minutes + 15 minutes discussion

Question posed by EKR for discussion:

The general assumption for the DDR threat model so far is that:

1. (presumably because DHCP is secure in some way). If that's not true,
   then I think we can agree that DDR does not provide much additional
   security benefit because the attacker can just substitute their own
   resolver [0].

2. Either the home network or the ISP network is insecure, otherwise
   you don't need DoX.

OPPORTUNISTIC MODE
So, first, its not entirely clear to me what the Opportunistic mode of
S 4.2 provides. In this scenario, presumably the client will be doing
TLS to the CPE (because otherwise the IP address would be the
resolver's public address), which means that we are concerned with the
attacker controlling the home network. So, in this scenario, we are
only getting value if you have a network in which:

1. The attacker can see traffic not destined for their IP address
   (otherwise there's not much point in encrypting).
2. The attacker cannot forge traffic from another IP address>
   (otherwise they can just impersonate the CPE because there
   is no certificate).

Are there an appreciable number of networks with these properties? If
so, can we write down where that happens and put it in Security
Considerations? If not, we should consider removing this mode.

Planning & Wrap up

• 5 min - Wrap up + Future Planning

As Time Permits