Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

On 10 Dec 2014, at 11:41, Joe Abley wrote: > On 7 Oct 2014, at 00:04, Tim Wicinski wrote: > >> Dear DNSOP WG, >> >> After discussions about the landing spot of this document, DNSOP vs the >> newer DNS Privacy WG, it was realized the updated DNSOP charter specifically >> had work like this i

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

On 7 Oct 2014, at 00:04, Tim Wicinski wrote: > Dear DNSOP WG, > > After discussions about the landing spot of this document, DNSOP vs the newer > DNS Privacy WG, it was realized the updated DNSOP charter specifically had > work like this in mind. > > This starts a Call for Adoption for draft

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

All The call period ended earlier this week. The only outspoken nay was Peter Koch. His reasons may prove to be true, as many have said. But the consensus is to adopt the work, and see where it takes us. The new version has been submitted in the document list. Based on the discussion, I'v

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

In message , Brian Dickson writes: > > TL;DR tidbit: IF the combined authority+resolver case (when switching > ISP hosting companies) is not handled by the QNAME minimization draft, > IMHO it should consider adding it. It is a real-world problem edge-case > seen frequently. > > > > On Tue, O

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

this is a +1. see below. > Phillip Hallam-Baker > Monday, October 20, 2014 12:04 PM > Just to expand on my comments after some arguments made against. > > The reason I think the WG should adopt the work item is that the > original design of DNS is now defective in th

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

On Oct 20, 2014, at 11:37 AM, Peter Koch wrote: > A whole system has > been successfully built around it with complex interdependencies. Please say more. What are those dependencies are from a protocol point of view? > 'parent centric' and 'child centric' resolvers and query patterns > evolved

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

TL;DR tidbit: IF the combined authority+resolver case (when switching ISP hosting companies) is not handled by the QNAME minimization draft, IMHO it should consider adding it. It is a real-world problem edge-case seen frequently. > On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 12:04:22AM -0400, Tim Wicinski wrote: >

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

Just to expand on my comments after some arguments made against. The reason I think the WG should adopt the work item is that the original design of DNS is now defective in the light of contemporary privacy concerns. There is no reason that the operators of registries should have sight of any info

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 12:04:22AM -0400, Tim Wicinski wrote: > Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption > by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view. I do not support accepting the draft (or the proposal it carries) as a work item. Other than

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Tim Wicinski wrote: > Dear DNSOP WG, > > After discussions about the landing spot of this document, DNSOP vs the > newer DNS Privacy WG, it was realized the updated DNSOP charter > specifically had work like this in mind. > > This starts a Call for Adoption for dr

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

On Friday, October 10, 2014, Francis Dupont wrote: > +1 for adoption (and at the occasion contribute, review, implement, etc). > > francis.dup...@fdupont.fr Me too! > > > ___ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

+1 for adoption (and at the occasion contribute, review, implement, etc). francis.dup...@fdupont.fr ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

On Oct 7, 2014, at 12:04 AM, Tim Wicinski mailto:tjw.i...@gmail.com>> wrote: Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view. I support adoption of this draft. Please also indicate if you are willing to co

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

On Tue, 7 Oct 2014, Tim Wicinski wrote: This starts a Call for Adoption for draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation. The draft is available here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation/ Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

On Oct 6, 2014, at 9:04 PM, Tim Wicinski wrote: > Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by > DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view. Yes, it is ready for adoption by DNSOP. > Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, re

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

On 07 Oct 2014, at 06:04, Tim Wicinski wrote: > Dear DNSOP WG, > > After discussions about the landing spot of this document, DNSOP vs the newer > DNS Privacy WG, it was realized the updated DNSOP charter specifically had > work like this in mind. > > This starts a Call for Adoption for draf

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

On 10/07/2014 06:04 AM, Tim Wicinski wrote: > This starts a Call for Adoption for > draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation. > > The draft is available here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation/ I support adoption, and am willing contribute/review. Gille

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

I support the draft. I will review/contribute. BR, Daniel On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 7:08 AM, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote: > > On Oct 7, 2014, at 12:04 AM, Tim Wicinski wrote: > > > > > Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption > by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clea

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

On Oct 7, 2014, at 12:04 AM, Tim Wicinski wrote: > > Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by > DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view. Done, will hold off sending edits to editor until after document adoption period. > > Please also in

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

On Oct 6, 2014, at 9:40 PM, Paul Vixie wrote: >> This starts a Call for Adoption for draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation. > i favour adoption. i will review, and contribute. +1 Regards, -drc ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

> Tim Wicinski > Monday, October 06, 2014 9:04 PM > ... > > This starts a Call for Adoption for > draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation. > > The draft is available here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation/ > > Please review thi

[DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

Dear DNSOP WG, After discussions about the landing spot of this document, DNSOP vs the newer DNS Privacy WG, it was realized the updated DNSOP charter specifically had work like this in mind. This starts a Call for Adoption for draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation. The draft is available