Re: [Doh] WG Review: DNS Over HTTPS (doh)

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Mon, 25 September 2017 23:11 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: doh@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: doh@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3913A1345E4; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 16:11:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.88
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.88 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 BjPiKWaqQrNd; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 16:11:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 1B5CB1345EB; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 16:11:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Svantevit.roach.at (cpe-70-122-154-80.tx.res.rr.com [70.122.154.80]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v8PNBrFc070283 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 25 Sep 2017 18:11:54 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-70-122-154-80.tx.res.rr.com [70.122.154.80] claimed to be Svantevit.roach.at
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>, doh@ietf.org
References: <150549029332.2975.12341647131707994474.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CA+9kkMBJAP23GmGf_ix-DMeOMB=Rbas+qsBQhrVwZuA5-Cv7Mg@mail.gmail.com> <03b11478-6b75-8e52-e6d9-612885804aad@nostrum.com> <CA+9kkMA1z8XF7QNXdY_bGbHdUD8UOBS57VbbJn7xmt7rb8SOGw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <f7595d14-7ead-c731-61e7-5b3cebeada14@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 18:11:53 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CA+9kkMA1z8XF7QNXdY_bGbHdUD8UOBS57VbbJn7xmt7rb8SOGw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/doh/4A6Y896QEQobyzbWSx3vI8dXu_w>
Subject: Re: [Doh] WG Review: DNS Over HTTPS (doh)
X-BeenThere: doh@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Over HTTPS <doh.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/doh>, <mailto:doh-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/doh/>
List-Post: <mailto:doh@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:doh-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/doh>, <mailto:doh-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 23:11:57 -0000

On 9/25/17 6:03 PM, Ted Hardie wrote:
> Thanks for summarizing the discussion and its outcomes.  Looking at 
> the revised charter, I noticed that it currently says "The use of 
> HTTPS and its existing PKI provides integrity and confidentiality, and 
> it also allows the transport to interoperate with common HTTPS 
> infrastructure and policy."  The choice not to specify a particular 
> version means that there may be more than one transport.  You may wish 
> to rephrase this or elide it to reflect the decision taken on that point.

Thanks. I've tweaked it to read: "...and it also allows interoperation 
with common HTTPS infrastructure and policy."

/a