Re: [Doh] [Ext] Reviewing Resolver-Associated DOH

["Hewitt, Rory" <[e-mail]>]

@Mark Nottingham

This came up because while chatting to @Paul Hoffman offline, I made it clear that there are lots of people who are sticking assorted files into their /.well-known/ folder, either directly or within sub-folders with no apparent consistency. The last thing anyone wants is a name-clash with an existing file, unlikely though that seems. I'm not sure the extent to which folks on this mailing list are aware of the horrible, ridiculous ways in which real people operate their web servers (as opposed to the 'idealized' way they may be presumed by standards-writers).

That being said, your point about bike-shedding is well-taken.

Thanks,

Rory

Rory Hewitt
Senior Solutions Architect
Global Services & Support

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Nottingham <[e-mail]> 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2019 3:00 PM
To: Hewitt, Rory <[e-mail]>
Cc: nusenu <[e-mail]>et>; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Doh] [Ext] Reviewing Resolver-Associated DOH

*well-known URI expert hat on*

Without speaking to the technical merit of the proposals being discussed, I'd like to discourage folks from thinking that they can reserve prefixes within the first well-known URI path segment; it is a managed space, but if we start this practice, we're going to have a nightmare managing the competing requirements.

If you want to reserve a prefix, reserve something like /.well-known/dns-servers/ and put the specific flavour after that (or in the retrieved file, or...).

All that said, bike shedding the name at this point probably isn't a terribly productive use of time.

Thanks,


> On 19 Mar 2019, at 8:56 am, Hewitt, Rory <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> I'm firmly in favor of having a naming 'convention' of:
> 
> 	/.well-known/dns-doh-servers
> 
> I think it's critical to have "dns-" as the name prefix, to clearly indicate that this is a DNS-related file. Then "doh-" to indicate that this is a DoH-specific file and so on... Using this convention means that the DoT folks can create their own files as
> 
> 	/.well-known/dns-dot-servers
> 
> While your idea of "/.well-known/dns-over-https-servers" fulfills the first "dns-" part of my convention (and it's also very clear what it is 😊), I guess I'm always going to be antsy that there's going to be a new DNS-related 'technology' in the future called e.g. "Carrier-Pigeon DNS" and that team is going to call their file "/.well-known/carrier-pigeon-dns". So it's better (IMHO) to explicitly indicate that it's a series of Three-Letter-Acronyms...
> 
> Of course, a naming convention only works if everyone both knows about it and follows it. Even if we decide to use a 'strict' naming convention, unless it's both 'publicized' and 'enforced', it's kinda useless.

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/