To: dns-privacy@ietf.org
References: <CAHw9_iLWW-e_de9ieq_oe_eR=RBWg9swG7EiAPTp93825Vm=pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160822151229.k5wms6k6kktrut4o@nic.fr>
 <d21a5081c7614e5bbeef371d83501693@XCH-RCD-017.cisco.com>
 <CAP8yD=s+cD_-=AVs8NU0ZxjxwKCY81xEm_JzBO7vu80P6DXysw@mail.gmail.com>
 <026a1e754895459186a5164f960e1b3c@XCH-RCD-017.cisco.com>
From: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0ea468bc-fe26-adb0-d012-65cc7afd3cff@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 15:33:53 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <026a1e754895459186a5164f960e1b3c@XCH-RCD-017.cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/bA0piQx3y449zM02a5jJeigwS3g>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] Start of WGLC for draft-ietf-dprive-dnsodtls.
Precedence: list



On 8/31/16 1:54 AM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) wrote:
> Hi Allison,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the review. Please see inline [TR]
>
>
>
> *From:*Allison Mankin [mailto:allison.mankin@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 31, 2016 5:36 AM
> *To:* Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) <tireddy@cisco.com>
> *Cc:* Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>; dns-privacy@ietf.org;
> DPRIVE-chairs@tools.ietf.org; draft-ietf-dprive-dnsodtls@ietf.org;
> Allison Mankin <allison.mankin@gmail.com>; John Heidemann <johnh@isi.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [dns-privacy] Start of WGLC for draft-ietf-dprive-dnsodtls.
>
>
>
> My calendar reminds me this is the last day of this WGLC.
>
> Overall comments:
>
> This is a well-written spec.  I'm especially appreciative of how much
> the draft has gotten aligned with RFC 7858.  I support its publication
> soon as an Experimental.
>
>
>
> Three suggestions/concerns:
>
>
>
> Abstract and Section 1 -
>
> I'd like to see a note added that the Experiment will be concluded when
> the spec is evaluated through an implementation and some testing of the
> details.
>
>
>
> [TR] I am not sure if this line is required, I don’t see other drafts
> with Experimental status adding this line !
>
>

WG Chair here.  In conversations with our A-D on this draft, the lack of 
any appearance of an implementation feels that this needs to be spelled 
out - one suggestion would be an "Implementation Section"

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6982