[dns-privacy] draft-ietf-dprive-unauth-to-authoritative-03.txt

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org> Mon, 12 July 2021 16:10 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
X-Original-To: dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F4373A20A9 for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 09:10:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 4ZSceCD59njH for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 09:10:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ppa3.lax.icann.org (ppa3.lax.icann.org [192.0.33.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93E943A20FA for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 09:10:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MBX112-W2-CO-2.pexch112.icann.org (out.mail.icann.org [64.78.33.6]) by ppa3.lax.icann.org (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with ESMTPS id 16CGAI11011536 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 16:10:18 GMT
Received: from MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org (10.226.41.128) by MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org (10.226.41.128) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.858.12; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 09:10:17 -0700
Received: from MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org ([10.226.41.128]) by MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org ([10.226.41.128]) with mapi id 15.02.0858.012; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 09:10:17 -0700
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
To: DNS Privacy Working Group <dns-privacy@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-dprive-unauth-to-authoritative-03.txt
Thread-Index: AQHXdzhnHTnRrlUX0kq6eGoyDVS9+g==
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 16:10:17 +0000
Message-ID: <05F9707E-2895-4515-8C55-5093D585E3F1@icann.org>
References: <162610616422.20490.11468347716654247078@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <162610616422.20490.11468347716654247078@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.0.32.234]
x-source-routing-agent: Processed
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_4ED662A3-A29D-4407-A750-B1965E3348F4"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-07-12_09:2021-07-12, 2021-07-12 signatures=0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/HpZHNbD2pKwpL1lTAMqGo-0sb-c>
Subject: [dns-privacy] draft-ietf-dprive-unauth-to-authoritative-03.txt
X-BeenThere: dns-privacy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Addition of privacy to the DNS protocol <dns-privacy.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dns-privacy>, <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dns-privacy/>
List-Post: <mailto:dns-privacy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy>, <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 16:10:30 -0000

Greetings again. We have published draft-ietf-dprive-unauth-to-authoritative-03 based on the general feeling that the WG wants to keep the WG unauthenticated draft and possible future WG fully-authenticated drafts separate for now. We will let draft-pp-dprive-common-features wither away unless we hear differently from the WG.

Are there things not in draft-ietf-dprive-unauth-to-authoritative-03 that should be there? Do we need to say more about how to be unauthenticated but still doing the best we can at privacy?

--Peter and Paul