Re: [Add] fixing coffee shop brokenness with DoH

[Bret Jordan <[e-mail]>]

We need to calmly and completely document the issues, the risks, and the ramifications. We need to do a design where we take input from all sides.  Where we rationally understand the various use cases and work together.  

Bret 

Sent from my Commodore 128D

PGP Fingerprint: 63B4 FC53 680A 6B7D 1447  F2C0 74F8 ACAE 7415 0050

> On Jul 23, 2019, at 11:17 PM, Tommy Jensen <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> I appreciate the feedback. If I bring an I-D it will be more broad than this particular point. The point of “DNS filtering isn’t dead” is small potatoes compared to the larger “how we can collaborate as ecosystem components on providing the most ideal DNS experience” I think we’re all trying to go for. I’m listening and participating on these threads to see if I can even convince myself of such a draft. 
> 
> Thanks,
> Tommy 
> From: Rob Sayre <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 8:02:42 PM
> To: Tommy Jensen <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Bret Jordan <[e-mail]>; Jim Reid <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [Add] fixing coffee shop brokenness with DoH
>  
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 7:57 PM Tommy Jensen <[e-mail]> wrote:
> I don’t agree that the email was “incoherent” as it pointed out the flaw in insisting that DNS filtering is a dead technology, the conflict being that DNS tampering is effective enough by bad actors to deserve work and attention but not effective enough by good actors to deserve consideration. 
> 
> Ah, now this sounds like a good idea for an Internet-Draft. Why not write up this idea? That way, it can be evaluated outside of a message thread.
> 
> thanks,
> Rob
>