Re: [Doh] Request for the DOH WG to adopt draft-hoffman-resolver-associated-doh

[Stephane Bortzmeyer <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 12:25:55AM +0000,
 Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]> wrote 
 a message of 121 lines which said:

> I did a short presentation on "Associating a DoH Server with a
> Resolver"
> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hoffman-resolver-associated-doh/)
> at the DNSOP WG. The presentation ended with the question of whether
> the draft should be taken up in a WG, and if so, where.

I tend to say Yes, because it is an interesting and useful
subject. However, I also tend to agree with Stephen Farrell that a
general "DNS resolver discovery solution", not limited to DoH, would
be a good idea.

In the current draft, I have a big concern about the idea of an
application (for instance the Web browser) having a specific DNS
resolver (section 5 of draft -07), different from the rest of the
applications on the same machine. It will be a nightmare to debug DNS
issues with such a setup. We cannot prevent people for doing bad
choices like this one but we should not condone it in a RFC. IMHO, the
correct setup is a shared DoH client, running on the local machine
(stubby, systemd-resolve, etc) or on the CPE.

[This is a purely technical issue, different for the more political
one raised by Bert Hubert.]