[DNSOP] re original_transport indicator

[Patrick McManus <[e-mail]>]

Hi All,

We've had quite a thread re the -05 optional parameter to the
dns-udpwireformat registration.

The parameter is defined as having no meaning for DoH, but was included to
accommodate a use case the dnsop wg is considering. Future proofing, if you
like.

Upon consideration (and a read of 6838), I think including this in doh is
premature because Media Type registrations can be updated by mechanisms
laid out in RFC6838 and in this case such an update could occur without
impacting existing DoH deployments. (i.e. it does not need to be future
proofed).

Therefore the definition of the parameter should accompany the work that
makes use of it if a future standards document chooses to go down that
path. As a bonus we avoid unused clutter if it doesn't happen. I also get
the feeling that there isn't yet strong consensus on the anticipated use
case or the exact form it needs to take - we should let that process work
itself out separately before registration.

I've chatted with Paul, and our recommendation is to remove the
original_transport parameter from DoH and encourage dnsop to update the
registration if/when a different standard needs to make use of it.

thoughts?

-Patrick