Re: [DNSOP] [Doh] New I-D: draft-reid-doh-operator

> On Mar 22, 2019, at 12:21 AM, Wes Hardaker wrote: > > If DNS privacy is a goal, systems and applications SHOULD use DNS over > TLS to encrypt traffic to their local resolver if possible (unless the > system and application distrusts the local resolver infrastructure). Maybe we should start

Re: [DNSOP] [Doh] New I-D: draft-reid-doh-operator

Vittorio Bertola writes: > This is actually the recommendation in section 4.6 of my draft :-) And > I agree, it looks like the only possible and reasonable compromise > between the two viewpoints. Another way of stating the preference ordering: If DNS privacy is a goal, systems and applications

Re: [DNSOP] [Doh] New I-D: draft-reid-doh-operator

> On 21 Mar 2019, at 22:29, Brian Dickson wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 3:03 PM Jacques Latour >> wrote: >> Plus! >> Is anyone looking at adding DoH and DoT servers as part of DHCP/SLAAC? So >> the local resolver and apps and browsers can go the _appropriate_ name >> resolution reso

Re: [DNSOP] [Doh] New I-D: draft-reid-doh-operator

In article <428d5ff2b5704cdf956a5919e330e...@cira.ca> you write: >Plus! >Is anyone looking at adding DoH and DoT servers as part of DHCP/SLAAC? I believe that for DoT, the idea is that the client just probes the DNS server address on port 853 and uses it if it gets an answer. I suppose you could

Re: [DNSOP] [Doh] New I-D: draft-reid-doh-operator

On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 3:03 PM Jacques Latour wrote: > Plus! > Is anyone looking at adding DoH and DoT servers as part of DHCP/SLAAC? So > the local resolver and apps and browsers can go the _appropriate_ name > resolution resource(s) using the protocol of choice. That would be much > simpler f

Re: [DNSOP] [Doh] New I-D: draft-reid-doh-operator

Plus! Is anyone looking at adding DoH and DoT servers as part of DHCP/SLAAC? So the local resolver and apps and browsers can go the _appropriate_ name resolution resource(s) using the protocol of choice. That would be much simpler for default configuration in enterprise and ISP. >From: DNSOP

Re: [DNSOP] [Doh] [hrpc] Proposal for a side-meeting on services centralization at IETF 104 Prague

Last week I did a draft agenda at https://github.com/jlivingood/IETF-104-SideMtg/blob/master/draft-agenda.txt but to some extent large parts may have been overcome by events and need major changes. Maybe it is sufficient to have the various drafts presented and let discussion flow from that? It

Re: [DNSOP] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8552 (5665)

On 3/21/2019 4:37 AM, RFC Errata System wrote: This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessa

[DNSOP] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8552 (5665)

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8552, "Scoped Interpretation of DNS Resource Records through "Underscored" Naming of Attribute Leaves". -- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5665 --

Re: [DNSOP] [Doh] [hrpc] Proposal for a side-meeting on services centralization at IETF 104 Prague

> Il 20 marzo 2019 alle 8.29 Stephane Bortzmeyer ha scritto: > > I modified the title of the meeting > because > there is obviously no consensus on the problem or on the > agenda. Anyway, a room is reserved if people want to meet on >