Re: [dns-privacy] How do we want to use draft-ietf-dprive-phase2-requirements?

[Brian Haberman <[e-mail]>]

Does anyone else have an opinion on this?

On 4/19/21 5:13 PM, Brian Haberman wrote:
> All,
>      As was raised on the thread discussing suggestions for the
> requirements draft, there is some question on how the WG wants to use
> draft-ietf-dprive-phase2-requirements in progressing our
> recursive-to-authoritative privacy work item. The draft currently has
> one sub-section that describes requirements (5.1) and another section
> that describes optional features (5.2), albeit with 2119 SHOULDs.
> 
>      My question to the WG is how do we want to use this draft? I see
> four possible approaches, but I am sure someone will point out others.
> 
> 1. Strictly requirements - these would be MUST-level functions that the
> WG determines have to be supported by any solutions draft.
> 
> 2. Strictly design considerations - these would be functional areas that
> the WG determines need to be considered, but not necessarily included,
> by any solutions draft.
> 
> 3. Requirements & design considerations - This is generally where the
> current draft sits IMO.
> 
> 4. Drop the draft and let the solutions flow.
> 
> Let's discuss the focus of the draft and then we can determine what
> updates are needed/necessary.
> 
> Regards,
> Brian
>