Re: [dns-privacy] Call for Adoption: draft-hal-adot-operational-considerations

[Ben Schwartz <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 12:30 PM Christian Huitema <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>
>
> > On Aug 20, 2019, at 9:15 AM, Ben Schwartz <bemasc=
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > A similar approach cannot be applied to ADoT.  Instead, we must define a
> complete, secure, performant ADoT negotiation system inside the DNS.  Until
> we have such a system defined, ADoT is not possible (except in limited
> experiments).
>
> We have a working example of such transition: using the alternate service
> indication in HTTP to transition to HTTP 2 or to QUIC. The key there is to
> consider the problem as a transition from old and insecure to new and
> secure and to effect that transition over time. Perform a regular query
> over UDP or TLS, obtain additional information that DoT or DoH could have
> been used, remember that for next time.
>
> Yes, that means that the first transaction is not protected. But then if
> we delay transition many more transactions are also unprotected. I like the
> idea of a progressive transition without disruption.
>

I certainly agree that a progressive transition without disruption is
necessary, whatever mechanism we define.  However, I think this discussion
is not on topic for this thread, except as evidence that we have not yet
defined such a mechanism.

-- Christian Huitema
>