Re: [Doh] New I-D: draft-reid-doh-operator

Warren Kumari <> Mon, 11 March 2019 02:27 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50A54130E46 for <>; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 19:27:59 -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, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bJOWP1OZLnXe for <>; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 19:27:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::832]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EA48127918 for <>; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 19:27:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id b3so3477543qtj.3 for <>; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 19:27:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=HBjoetofJ6r28f/IjgFqz586Getj/QcH7F38dYl4Qg0=; b=zpw7ZRNHtG9crE8vMvxiu7OotyDtEx/ratNn0UXH0fvKJXTlTtGt1t4ZE8/OxP+b1F haIjv8q7WdGcb9tJlJi2p+t3eFARpwgqhmIyUi2qrD9c5EBf+7/Y7CzEEOgsbz0rU3he /xq8cLX7kIF0sIcBSB/cFGY3iUp/+9ibJZ2AIEEoaMLm73TCDd44b0AYM5k3Bz2fOGCD OPwb3AJH3K+fZb+BrxpRiuOU+xc8lmYiHQNHPO+XsBWDx5ErzLqSwEHZefxKzH7/3Cze AbTKsDw/CBL8qqvnfcF+5F2Bs8exRwujpw4fL5Wu4fXtz2XFM2uCbYUqG5Xzj0zAjykX /zug==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=HBjoetofJ6r28f/IjgFqz586Getj/QcH7F38dYl4Qg0=; b=P4u0q5/u0ruXMg/wYg9Xwu9Q3QvyJFJ2adY4XatmT0WnuEJGxzy0+b51ofDplMav8q 7n8ewbR94L+JLeEluyef/7ST58Ls5Vh5SSYzwIgli3CFS9mnjmWGSG63f4eZkCXMmzvL cCDUuKYh+J56Xd64TcpXoshzSCbVdDZm0dE7ycqHLUWYYorAnWIU+ZpsQPz9IvJwvNpT qD7FXwWMAmexyIO0HEVQLXzRXMsalwEDhWna6kXB90jM2YWw7TRQifaTuVOO0AH5bsbW iTDJ1dr8UVmA7Yj+iBZmcmNbJeAxY+NVhyigvLPdMFUuH5ul01vEky+Ee+E6Fhh2uyIo yRBg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUaf46clluW8pJVJUS6XerCOkK1kiO3fU0GJCeTcmNaxD6xCf6z CFpO0abkUHRMsI38tFbbS3kEwQphmslxSiIisVdUaQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz47FwY02Rl0NP21bddrPy+1vxb1C8uQSKQL5JQD9FeD7S9t6pNalqgCVIOQjt5VmiALdFHlfu7kGYwgl+uCk4=
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:191b:: with SMTP id t27mr24637523qtj.163.1552271274887; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 19:27:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Warren Kumari <>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 11:27:17 +0900
Message-ID: <>
To: "Livingood, Jason" <>
Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer <>, Jim Reid <>, DoH WG <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ef62e10583c851ce"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Doh] New I-D: draft-reid-doh-operator
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: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 02:28:00 -0000

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:26 AM Livingood, Jason <> wrote:

> On 3/10/19, 4:02 AM, "Doh on behalf of Stephane Bortzmeyer" <
> on behalf of> wrote:
> >    I'm surprised that it is published more or less at the same time
>     draft-livingood-doh-implementation-risks-issues. They have a lot of
>     overlap, and even one author in common. May be a merge would be a good
>     idea?
> [JL] Perhaps so. Time was short before the cutoff and I think we wanted to
> get some thoughts out there for comment.
>     > The specific issue mentioned  above is exactly the same whether I
> use DoH or DNS-over-UDP to
>     or
> [JL] I think a slight difference is that with public DNS services, the
> uptake occurs gradually as each individual user makes an explicit choice.
> This isn't the case should large apps enable DoH.

s/This isn't the case should large apps enable DoH./This isn't the case
should large apps enable using their own resolvers./

DoH is a protocol - the concerns you are talking about (and I'm glad they
are being discussed, they are important policy discussions) are not
specific to DoH -- this sentence works just as well with DNS-over-TLS,
plain DNS, using some completely proprietary name resolution mechanism. It
is trivial for any "large app" writer to invent a proprietary way to do DNS
resolution - please please, let's keep the DoH (protocol) versus "apps
doing their own resolution" separate.


> _______________________________________________
> Doh mailing list

I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in
the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of