Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Re: New draft for consideration:

[Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]>]

On Mar 24, 2019, at 11:18 AM, bert hubert <[e-mail]> wrote:
> It may be good to add a note that "DoH is the protocol as defined in
> [RFC8484]. The operation of this protocol by browser vendors and cloud
> providers is frequently also called 'DoH'. DoH-the-protocol is
> therefore frequently conflated with DoH being used to perform
> DNS lookups in a different fashion than configured by the network settings
> (see DaT and DaO)."

A much better outcome would be that people who are saying DoH when they mean DaT or DaO would use the new terms. That is, this is a forward-looking document because we're making up new terms.

> Secondly, I understand the technical need for the wording of the definition
> of DaO.  But I had to read this all a few times before I understood that
> 'DaO' includes what I've referred to as DoC (DNS over Cloud). I think
> definitions should be easy to understand because otherwise they don't
> function.

I fully agree; proposed changes to this wording are quite welcome. It's a new term, after all.

> I'm also not too hot for conflating "user consciously changes
> /etc/resolv.conf or equivalent" with "application makes the choice for the
> user". 

The split here is more "someone changes from traditional without the user knowing, when the user cares". If you have a better way to express that, that would be great.

> Perhaps we should talk about 'Per-application stubs'? Because this is the
> nub. 

Maybe, but I'm hesitant to make the break that way because some applications' stubs use the traditional resolver, others don't. I would be hesitant to conflate those two.

> I'm willing to write text once we have discussed this a bit.

Thanks!

--Paul Hoffman