Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] WG Call for Adoption: draft-pauly-dprive-oblivious-doh

[Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]>]

> Please reply to the mailing list with your views (positive or negative)
> on the WG adopting the document and your supporting arguments.

During the WG meeting last week, I expressed strong negative views about adoption. The ensuing discussion helped change my opinion. I was looking at this as "there are almost no users who would want to turn this on", but then came around to "there are browsers who would want to turn this on for the benefit of their users". If the browser takes responsibility for the additional delay in responses, and takes responsibility for watching for the new failure modes and remediating them, then this protocol might be worthwhile even though it adds delay and complexity.

The deciding factor for me was that the authors turned over protocol control to the WG. The "we've already implemented this" tone in the various presentations in the past few months caused me to assume the opposite.

Thus, I mildly support adoption.

--Paul Hoffman