Re: [Add] Unstated assumptions in What to do in this potential working group

["John Levine" <[e-mail]>]

In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>I still think that having an agreed write-up of the issues and/or of the use cases, even without any recommendation on how to deal with them, could also be useful. This was the main
>subject of the original three drafts presented in Prague.

Agreed.  We're still seeing people argue with unstated assumptions that are obviously not the same.

For example, a bunch of messages have gone by that clearly assume that
the person using a device has chosen to use a particular DoH service.
I can easily believe that could be the case for the very atypical
bunch of people in this discussion, but not for grandma using whatever
defaults her browser or phone app or ISP or malware set, nor for IoT
devices that use whatever.

I see similar cross assumptions in "trustworthy result."  Some people
apparently assume it's synonymous with DNSSEC validated, but for me if
it's a bot trying to find its C&C host, the trustworthy result is
NXDOMAIN or SERVFAIL.

I think it would be useful to try and tease these out so we at least
have a chance of agreeing on what we disagree about.

R's,
John