Re: [dns-privacy] New Version Notification for draft-peterson-dot-dhcp-00.txt

[Brian Haberman <[e-mail]>]

If an RA option were to carry the IP address of the name server, that
could be done within the framework of RFC 8106. That document already
describes an RA option for advertising DNS servers to clients.

Regards,
Brian

On 4/29/19 5:28 AM, Ole Troan wrote:
>> In a recent discussion in the DoH mailing list around a draft that describes resolver discovery, Martin Thomson made the suggestion[0] to use DHCP and RA options instead to transmit both DNS over HTTP resolver addresses, but more relevant to this WG also DNS over TLS endpoints as well. I have published draft-peterson-dot-dhcp, which describe the relevant DHCPv4, DHCPv6, and RA options to support this.
>>
>> Could I please get feedback, specifically if the WG is in support of it.
> 
> I'm not very keen on yet another DNS configuration option.
> But if you were to do it in the RA, I wonder if it wouldn't be cleaner to do it with the universal RA approach:
> 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-troan-6man-universal-ra-option-01
> 
> Currently the DNS option is defined as (in CDDL):
>  dns = {
>       dnssl : [* tstr]
>       rdnss : ipv6-addresses : [* tstr]
>       ? lifetime : uint
>  }      
> 
> And you could just add a new attribute for transport:
> 
>  dns = {
>       dnssl : [* tstr]
>       rdnss : ipv6-addresses : [* tstr]
>       ? lifetime : uint
>       transport : "udp" / "tls" / "https"
>  }
> 
> Ole
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dns-privacy mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
>