Re: [Doh] [Ext] Re: New version: draft-ietf-doh-resolver-associated-doh-03.txt

Paul Hoffman <> Sun, 24 March 2019 09:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DABD127979 for <>; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 02:58:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gLTUQdhYg1zY for <>; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 02:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D393012785F for <>; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 02:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1367.3; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 02:58:30 -0700
Received: from ([]) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1367.000; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 02:58:30 -0700
From: Paul Hoffman <>
To: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <>
CC: DoH WG <>
Thread-Topic: [Ext] Re: [Doh] New version: draft-ietf-doh-resolver-associated-doh-03.txt
Thread-Index: AQHU4hptyKjcm1FcoU67W4LREZZQWKYa9IIAgAAM5IA=
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 09:58:29 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Doh] [Ext] Re: New version: draft-ietf-doh-resolver-associated-doh-03.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Over HTTPS <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 09:58:34 -0000

Thanks for the quick read!

On Mar 24, 2019, at 10:12 AM, Joseph Lorenzo Hall <> wrote:
> Couple of small things:
> typo, Intro: "Users typically configure their DNS recursive resolvers with through automatic configuration"


> I don't get the "Do53" abbreviation, but I'll grab you and maybe you can help me make sense of it (a very small thing considering you could have said DoPotatoes or whatever).

I thought it was clearer than than "DoU/T". It is short for "DNS over port 53".

> Are there any outcomes you can see where IANA is compelled to delegate the SUDNs here?

No, very definitely not. That's why the "IANA Considerations" say explicitly MUST NOT. IANA follows the rules from the RFCs defining new entries.

> Or where an authoritarian government might require resolvers to collide, if that makes sense?

Governments, authoritarian or not, can intercede in the DNS in many ways.

> In privacy considerations the draft says, "can increase communication privacy because of the TLS protection." I'm wondering if it makes sense to say explicitly "confidentiality and integrity" in a parenthetical near privacy?


--Paul Hoffman