On Mon, 28 Sep 2020, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
Well, let's amend that to "first when it's smart to be
first." We can't ever
*require* DNSSEC validation, because Windows and macOS are not going to do
so.
https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-pauly-add-resolver-discovery-01.html
That draft has a Microsoft and Apple co-author on it.
It states for example:
There are several methods that can be used to discover and validate a resolver
designation:
* Discovery using SVCB DNS records (Section 3.1), and validation using DNSSEC
This document is precisely to discover DNSSEC (and DNS encryption)
services reliably so that DNSSEC validation can be turned on by default.
Can you cite the documentation for your statement that these two vendors
are not working on enabling DNSSEC validation?
They have to be first. I could just as well counter with "How
can Fedora
be first if it refuses to implement split DNS behavior by default that breaks
user expectations and leaks queries to unexpected networks?"
How about systemd-resolved people join the IETF draft process, so that
they can still influence the protocols while they are being designed, so
that it can be made to work with systemd-resolved properly? There are a
dozens of long time seasonsed DNS architects and programmers at the IETF
working on this problem now. Join their effort.
As for just passing along records, see Zbigniew's responses;
it's possible to
do by default, just not a priority. This is really only interesting for
specialized applications like mail servers that live on controlled networks
where you know that DNSSEC is not broken, i.e. not relevant for 99% of users.
Please stop filtering out the use cases you don't like.
Besides that, what percentage of desktops / laptops uses Linux versus
what percentage of servers use Linux? I would strongly argue the case
is quite the reverse. Linux desktop uses are 0.000000% and Linux on servers
is like 99.999999%
If you're running such applications, it's a one-line change
in resolved.conf
to enable DNSSEC, not really a big deal. It's annoying to have to edit an
extra config file, yes, and we should do better, but I don't think that
should derail this change.
If systemd-resolved was only installed on Linux desktops, you would have
a much stronger argument. But right now it is part of the same package as
/sbin/init.
Paul