Re: [dns-privacy] draft-ietf-dprive-phase2-requirements: The User Perspective and Use Cases

[Brian Haberman <[e-mail]>]

Hi Scott,

On 3/23/21 11:26 AM, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:

>> >From the pure user perspective, do they even know that their "DNS
>> server" is an intermediary?
> 
> [SAH] For most people, probably not.
> 
>> What phase 2 requirement can be derived from the above?
> 
> [SAH] There isn't one. This text appears in the Appendix, which (I believe) helps set the context for the requirements that appear in the sections that precede it without including additional requirements. If there's an intention to include requirements in Section 9, it might help to call it something other than "Appendix", to move it up higher in the document, and to think about where normative language is needed. My preference is to leave it where it is, use it to provide background information, and not include normative language.

Sorry, I didn't word my question clearly enough. I agree that there
shouldn't be requirements in the appendix. It does serve the purpose of
providing context, but does not appear to have a direct link to any
requirements that have been documented. So, my question is does this
context lead to any specific requirement that should be captured in this
document?

Regards,
Brian