Re: [Doh] Seeking input on draft-03

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Patrick,

On 08/02/18 20:24, Patrick McManus wrote:
> WRT the removal of .wk:
> 
> * its previous presence had never been meant as a discovery mechanism of
> the form "I know a hostname, therefore I know the URL". origin is a
> security primitive for http, but its not an addressing primitive for http
> services such as a DoH endpoint.. indeed the DoH server might sensibly wish
> to offer multiple URIs on the same host (in the same way some free dns

Fair point.

> providers make a variety of resolution policies available with different IP
> addresses).  The configuration primitive for a DoH server is the URI - not
> origin.
> 
> * I had originally included .wk as a bit of future proofing for a use case
> not part of the DoH charter (not to enable it, but being sure not to
> preclude it at a later time). I have been convinced that .wk is not
> necessary for that - and so it was removed from the draft. I regret that
> these two things were confused by readers of <= -02 due to my own
> composition skills (or lack thereof).
> 
> As to Stephen's query - this was both discussed f2f in singapore and
> https://github.com/dohwg/draft-ietf-doh-dns-over-https/issues/24 . Of

I read that and it's overall convincing enough for me.

I do also wonder about the point raised there about doing surveys of
doh deployments - as one poster (willscott) said though, I'm not sure
if I think enabling that is a good thing or not. (The downside being
that censors discover deployments too.) I'd not argue that's reason
enough to retain well-known in the draft.

Cheers,
S.

> course there hasn't been consensus declared on the issue - the editors are
> just trying to make the newer drafts as closely aligned with the group's
> discussion as we can manage as part of the proces> -P
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> On 08/02/18 18:05, Ben Schwartz wrote:
>>>
>>> One important difference is that draft-03 no longer proposes a
>>> ".well-known" entry.  In draft-02 and prior, clients could check for the
>>> presence of a DOH service at the default path, given only the domain name
>>> of a server.  In draft-03, there is no default path, so clients must be
>>> configured with the full URL of the DOH endpoint.
>>
>> Apologies if I'm forgetting a thread where this was discussed,
>> but what's the reason for dropping .well-known? (If there is a
>> thread, a pointer to that is a sufficient answer.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> S.
>>
>> --
>> PGP key change time for me.
>> New-ID 7B172BEA; old-ID 805F8DA2 expires Jan 24 2018.
>> NewWithOld sigs in keyservers.
>> Sorry if that mucks something up;-)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Doh mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/doh
>>
>>
> 

-- 
PGP key change time for me.
New-ID 7B172BEA; old-ID 805F8DA2 expires Jan 24 2018.
NewWithOld sigs in keyservers.
Sorry if that mucks something up;-)