Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation

[Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]>]

Just to expand on my comments after some arguments made against.

The reason I think the WG should adopt the work item is that the original
design of DNS is now defective in the light of contemporary privacy
concerns. There is no reason that the operators of registries should have
sight of any information they do not have a need to know.

The business relationships built up over the years on the assumption that
this data will be available and for sale to the highest bidder are of
neither consequence nor concern.

These practices are going to be insisted on regardless of choices made by
this group. If indeed minimization has operational effects it is much
better to document them and allow parties to avoid unintended consequences.
At this point however, there is no evidence of harm.

Proof of very substantial showing of harm should be necessary to block
consideration of a proposal at the outset. Opponents will after all have
plenty of time to make objections in WG process, that being the point of WG
process.

It would be a terrible mistake to reject this work without a hearing
because of the mere possibility that a problem could occur. If indeed the
state of the DNS is as fragile as is suggested it will soon collapse of its
own accord. I rather suspect however that the fears are unfounded.


On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]
> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Tim Wicinski <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Dear DNSOP WG,
>>
>> After discussions about the landing spot of this document, DNSOP vs the
>> newer DNS Privacy WG, it was realized the updated DNSOP charter
>> specifically had work like this in mind.
>>
>> This starts a Call for Adoption for draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-
>> minimisation.
>>
>> The draft is available here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/
>> doc/draft-bortzmeyer-dns-qname-minimisation/
>>
>> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption
>> by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.
>>
>
> yes
>
>
>
>> Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.
>>
>
> <nohats>
> yes
> </nohats>
>
>
>> This call for adoption ends Monday 20-October-2014 at 23:59
>>
>