Re: [Doh] [Ext] A question of trust (was Re: Draft -09 and WGLC #2)

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org> Thu, 31 May 2018 15:18 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
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 C62DB127286 for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 May 2018 08:18:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 FUaBTT--nGQH for <doh@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 May 2018 08:18:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out.west.pexch112.icann.org (unknown [64.78.40.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20BBF12EAD3 for <doh@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 May 2018 08:18:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) by PMBX112-W1-CA-2.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1367.3; Thu, 31 May 2018 08:18:38 -0700
Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org ([64.78.40.21]) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG ([64.78.40.21]) with mapi id 15.00.1367.000; Thu, 31 May 2018 08:18:37 -0700
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, Sara Dickinson <sara@sinodun.com>
CC: "doh@ietf.org" <doh@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Doh] [Ext] A question of trust (was Re: Draft -09 and WGLC #2)
Thread-Index: AQHT+MDH1fDyXz4bL0C/ZAkrkwFDV6RKTySAgAAYGoCAAAHjAA==
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 15:18:36 +0000
Message-ID: <54C8B3CF-55EF-48F9-87FD-A38913D2C4FB@icann.org>
References: <CA9BEE64-9F16-4CCC-A1E0-4C7FD45C455C@icann.org> <20180528161043.GB12038@mx4.yitter.info> <CABkgnnV3kKFCzKLfPf_0WZh95jr2vEt652Rb4EozfqROCVsJdA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOdDvNrPU9WM3WgcX1AVF39D3bGdxCKgPAF_afhfv2Qt0pZR5g@mail.gmail.com> <DB7D40D6-455A-48DD-AB98-DF2CF0866222@sinodun.com> <CAOdDvNopKvs18jQizgyiAQq8UyB4GwdqyXfXPa+25pNrxWg8pA@mail.gmail.com> <20180530143833.GB3110@mx4.yitter.info> <197F1CB0-DFA5-4720-94E0-223D708B0D79@icann.org> <3920ACC9-D167-4E2C-88E7-7A2AB317EA16@sinodun.com> <33BE0098-C168-4B75-9B8F-D31AB45749AA@icann.org> <20180531151151.GA3060@mx4.yitter.info>
In-Reply-To: <20180531151151.GA3060@mx4.yitter.info>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [192.0.32.234]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <6A390DE34B8C1C4DA41A7FD2ABEC7596@pexch112.icann.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/doh/IlKglOw52O2Op28s2oQ2bfLldQY>
Subject: Re: [Doh] [Ext] A question of trust (was Re: Draft -09 and WGLC #2)
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: Thu, 31 May 2018 15:18:43 -0000

Thanks, this does make it clearer. Proposal: move this sentence:
   Configuration and discovery of the URI Template is done out of band from this protocol.
up to before the first use of the word "configuration", and change it to:

Configuration, discovery, and updating of the URI Template is done out of band from this protocol. Note that configuration might be manual (such as a user typing URI Templatess in the UI for "options") or automatic (such as URI Templates being supplied in responses from DHCP or similar protocols).

Is this sufficient?

--Paul Hoffman