IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Add] meeting hum: should the IETF take up this work?

Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> Wed, 31 July 2019 16:51 UTC

Return-Path: <jim@rfc1035.com>
X-Original-To: add@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: add@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82B15120451 for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 09:51:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yYit22Cskrkm for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 09:51:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shaun.rfc1035.com (shaun.rfc1035.com [93.186.33.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 236CA1202F8 for <add@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 09:51:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wallace.rfc1035.com (hutch.rfc1035.com [195.54.233.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shaun.rfc1035.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9D4FA242109D; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:51:50 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
In-Reply-To: <2e16aa6d-748b-f44a-3b1c-0b656e2195ab@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:51:49 +0100
Cc: add@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9E0BBDD5-73A0-415E-B891-CC86BD62F124@rfc1035.com>
References: <CAChr6Sx9TEt6CMzRRrdb-HwT_k987oW=4yF1FCbDF17zkaE2Vg@mail.gmail.com> <AAEA003A-58DB-4FEE-81B2-BBFE9BBB2A37@rfc1035.com> <CAChr6SwA+HM4u5-xpUxQXPH8G8k7sfm6AETJJ019HE=bsq+OXA@mail.gmail.com> <8F094057-DFBC-4732-9DA4-BE46E7914C8A@rfc1035.com> <20190724165951.GB29051@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <821B448B-F7EA-46A5-837D-DA0E8C60643A@open-xchange.com> <d653d422-4a71-9fab-fd2e-b8ddaa476f91@nostrum.com> <488E2CE0-73D5-4B9E-A5AD-28FDCB95ED2A@cable.comcast.com> <CABcZeBPdf5Ce0W2y09ff2eF8yL37KLK4uUoeYs=7+YPMEtVnhg@mail.gmail.com> <FB0D3A9A-BE96-45CF-AD0F-E63ADEB7F97A@telefonica.com> <CAMOjQcE1QyXLm0Jc9nE7V0Z=MESpLdcgptHwLAAYfU6BOdAt8Q@mail.gmail.com> <2e16aa6d-748b-f44a-3b1c-0b656e2195ab@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Peterson <nosretep.samoht@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/add/Flwhj-92lamJ-nGy6QmpMbB_-ns>
Subject: Re: [Add] meeting hum: should the IETF take up this work?
X-BeenThere: add@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Applications Doing DNS <add.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/add>, <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/add/>
List-Post: <mailto:add@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/add>, <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:51:56 -0000


> On 31 Jul 2019, at 17:12, Thomas Peterson <nosretep.samoht@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I agree, and have been discussing the idea off-list of having a document that also covers DNS trust anchors and their role, particularly when the network is providing DoT/DoH services, and the considerations where clients need a Do53 bootstrap. Maybe it would make sense to cover all of these points in a single informational document, as I don't believe such considerations belong in a BCP?

This is a badly needed document and I'll be happy to work on it. I think it could even end up as a BCP.

The big question is which WG would be the best place to develop this I-D. It seems to straddle the doh and dprive WGs and wouldn't be suitable for dnsop.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email