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

Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> Mon, 26 April 2021 19:44 UTC

Return-Path: <brian@innovationslab.net>
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 835903A2D92 for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 12:44:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=innovationslab-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gqYOq2Nu5o8f for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 12:44:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x729.google.com (mail-qk1-x729.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::729]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A8983A2D60 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 12:44:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x729.google.com with SMTP id u20so25589114qku.10 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 12:44:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=innovationslab-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:from:to:references:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to; bh=TBmIsmedmxykKiGHLXARMPdU9fcPnhhq6spI5BOA2RE=; b=tEo9RfexKyNS9heuKjpngboLDfpCgyUOMmY2kQ3hJKXtRCkDOA3+Ncx58gc2WzcqR6 uKZy6X6YADtFEgz6rE4gYlcQzyhvWU8+MknK5Yi41caUe2xVPpLAZecA8NfDnCf4VAsO AYCWgdIgXHEbZhsYcaUHL+fh3PunAXiiZWiuEVNn93txwEIg2gKfr+ucgvqV3VB4QQzc mwQ2iBD1OVoHF7x50jjgAKG8/7zsYRXnED0UD9rgfn0m5qgOM91dv4vujslb2DqogR2F 9Mo1pHKvvv07tTh9/O5hgITs7aV7wa8Fo9APlsB+BsP5vzzTfXDXMV85oy+8Ayq39cog NfOg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:from:to:references:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=TBmIsmedmxykKiGHLXARMPdU9fcPnhhq6spI5BOA2RE=; b=sbfBrYX15lCBjY169bGwa7yuU8FS9uVANY3cKFMmcrt2eflhrx7AxhXvG4gvQO8VXU Uje9jtcjnzPMVZYAs/ib1rCQcvNZAv35qBEDxHGbuSheu2RLu+CgR3BlJVZx+JN+rFMK 8gFORr0u0UPGnrM3y9Ha4mnpGd8YUjxfxHGgl9peutTxnIhOhHYdZPGQdDx1PcqxCSmW I7nOIHWV3gqJ4euQrmH2+2puigjED8NDm+d1mHY+FVrEElgMSlIFequOl/u2cAFtnlH9 9wnPEBqZJatQKshc5F5wVXo88PVwjc4b/6SoOyj+oQ2QVmTuig53jP6IiAqZWWn1DJ49 VH0A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5302sgEzxeXERYBcrUekRJqTqYCUzD1iuGLNhfKZNcrT/AnS903Q vMzXfpFErsz/leH/wg8k7xuQIR2to5yWWFp8
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx1ZMDN3ofdC8xSGOZcDkAmRUvpuqRxBmbugcex07+NI+LgvA9eEnSjMF2GqTs/2bPhRbWdNg==
X-Received: by 2002:ae9:f403:: with SMTP id y3mr6606222qkl.14.1619466277989; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 12:44:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clemson.local ([2601:5ce:300:84e:680f:d0:98d6:a3ad]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 97sm12288242qte.20.2021.04.26.12.44.37 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 26 Apr 2021 12:44:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
To: "dns-privacy@ietf.org" <dns-privacy@ietf.org>
References: <121ae494-d7f0-37da-cf53-44f75df2fa75@innovationslab.net>
Message-ID: <51ecd372-c178-14ff-5168-81e2e87350e9@innovationslab.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 15:44:36 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <121ae494-d7f0-37da-cf53-44f75df2fa75@innovationslab.net>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ryHPnULmMAMiFK8hxEIlKcFS8QJw443o0"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/rlbgi9BSIY2IE8nK9SlkJcNpe4g>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] How do we want to use draft-ietf-dprive-phase2-requirements?
X-BeenThere: dns-privacy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <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: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 19:44:55 -0000

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
>