Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-dprive-unilateral-probing-09
Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org> Sat, 05 August 2023 00:53 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 A0954C14CE3F; Fri, 4 Aug 2023 17:53:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id opCv3P6yHdwB; Fri, 4 Aug 2023 17:53:41 -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 D43D2C14F747; Fri, 4 Aug 2023 17:53:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MBX112-E2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org (out.mail.icann.org [64.78.33.7]) by ppa3.lax.icann.org (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTPS id 3750rfbE013719 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 5 Aug 2023 00:53:41 GMT
Received: from MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org (10.226.41.128) by MBX112-W2-CO-2.pexch112.icann.org (10.226.41.130) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1118.30; Fri, 4 Aug 2023 17:53:40 -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 15.02.1118.030; Fri, 4 Aug 2023 17:53:40 -0700
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
To: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
CC: "dns-privacy@ietf.org" <dns-privacy@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Ext] [dns-privacy] AD review of draft-ietf-dprive-unilateral-probing-09
Thread-Index: AQHZuKcWOROzZeeAlU+h5/kTGbtASK/UN8uAgAc6yoA=
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2023 00:53:39 +0000
Message-ID: <E1597D75-8454-4396-ABE6-1D51C30FE1BE@icann.org>
References: <C0F3EA5F-96EF-4777-94E3-3B3913134483@cisco.com> <0BCDA17C-0FC3-41B4-9348-AD4DDC0AF5EA@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <0BCDA17C-0FC3-41B4-9348-AD4DDC0AF5EA@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.0.32.234]
x-source-routing-agent: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <4BAF662931A1084DA6A2ED6EDE31C01E@pexch112.icann.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.267,Aquarius:18.0.957,Hydra:6.0.591,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2023-08-04_23,2023-08-03_01,2023-05-22_02
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/rRwEVfqnDHmX7NJob6eLl_LzbiU>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-dprive-unilateral-probing-09
X-BeenThere: dns-privacy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Sat, 05 Aug 2023 00:53:43 -0000
On Jul 31, 2023, at 8:29 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > # Shepherd's write-ip > > > The shepherd's write-up states "the WG would like to ensure that this list remains in the document once it is published as an RFC" but the appendix A states "RFC Editor: please remove this section before publication". I.e., the shepherd's write-up and the I-D MUST be coherent ;-) > > EV> we do need the shepherd's write-up and I-D being consistent on this point. *Let me know when either the shepherd's write-up or the I-D is modified.* You and the shepherd are already discussing this on the mailing list. > # Section 1.1 > > I am always uneasy with the use of BCP14 normative language outside of a standard track or BCP document. > > EV> I have read Paul's reply, as long as authors are aware, let it be. Expect some non-blocking comments by some ADs during the IESG evaluation. This is a ripe topic for a statement from the various RFC stream managers so that we document authors will know what to expect. I do hope those comments are non-blocking. > # Section 3 > > This was probably discussed over the mailing list, but must DoT & DoQ replies be also identical to Do53 replies ? The current text is a little underspecified. > > Paul> The last paragraph of Section 3 says "An authoritative server implementing DoT or DoQ MUST authoritatively serve the same zones over all supported transports." How should we say that differently to be more specfied? > > EV> I still find the text a little unclear about the returned DNS replies (e.g., the answer section must be identical in Do53 and DoT). I am leaving the choice to the authors about whether to add further clarification text. Got it: "serve the same zones" versus "have the same replies". We'll make that change in -10. > # Section 3.5 > > Expect some comments during the IESG review if the SHOULDs do not have some wording about when the SHOULDs does not apply. > > EV> thanks, Paul, for explaining the somehow convoluted/complex clause "this might be limited by e.g. not receiving an EDNS(0) option in the query". You may consider rendering it easier to parse though. Sure, I'll make a run at that for -10 as well. > # Section 4.2 > > Is there any chance to also use an IPv6 example ? > > EV> Obviously, there was no chance ;-) We chose to keep the examples consistent with each other. I'll prep a -10, and we'll submit it next week. --Paul Hoffman
- [dns-privacy] AD review of draft-ietf-dprive-unil… Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-d… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-d… Christian Huitema
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-d… Rob Sayre
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-d… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-d… Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
- Re: [dns-privacy] AD review of draft-ietf-dprive-… Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-d… Brian Haberman
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-d… Paul Wouters
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-d… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-d… Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-d… Brian Haberman