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

[Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[e-mail]>]

To a slightly smaller crowd ...

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 15 Sep 2017, at 14:44, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>
> On 15/09/17 20:25, Ted Hardie wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> This set of questions is pretty different from the ones you get with
>>> "function over different paths", because the locus of control moves from
>>> the mostly-trusted browser to the mostly not trusted downloaded
>>> application.
>>>
>>
>> FWIW, I share Ted's concerns about origins. Regardless
>> of what approaches are taken, the effects of this need
>> to be well understood I think. I don't object to the WG
>> being chartered though but would suggest that there be
>> a mention in the charter that the WG needs to document
>> the consequences, including the dangers, of caching and
>> re-use of DNS answers for likely implementations.
>>
>
> The charter already points to the document that the work will be based on,
> which has that topic in it, because *you* pointed it out in the earlier
> discussion of the document. As co-author on the document, I assure you we
> will not remove it, if for no other reason than I wouldn't want to face
> your wrath again in IETF Last Call. :-)


I recently pointed out, while complaining about pervasive monitoring in an
AD Evaluation for a TSV document, that not only is
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7258 a BCP, but if
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/roster/secdir really is the list of reviewers
like https://trac.ietf.org/trac/sec/wiki/SecurityDirectorate says it is,
authors have a non-zero chance of getting an RFC 7258 author as their
sec-dir reviewer ...

The same probability of getting Stephen would apply here.

You are very wise :-)

Spencer