Re: Call for Adoption: draft-song-dns-wireformat-http

[Mark Nottingham <[e-mail]>]

> On 3 Aug 2016, at 2:39 AM, Martin Thomson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> It would be really awesome if someone could summarize the reasons that
> the alternative proposals (those cited in the doc) were not adopted.
> I see a few red flags in the doc:
> 
> "The protocol is intended to serve as a sort of DNS VPN" -- there's a
> long history of abuse of HTTP of exactly this form; probably because
> it's easier.  See the above question regarding potentially better
> alternatives.

+1. 

Would DNSOP consider alternative approaches if they were submitted soonish, or are you committed to using this document as a starting point? 


> 
> "in this approach wire-format data is wrapped with a HTTP header and
> transmitted on port 80 or 443."  -- two things: the wire format seems
> to go in the body; and using port 80 is a terrible idea.
> 
> I don't see any reason that this needs to use a .well-known resource.
> 
> What happens when you get a response where the ID doesn't match the request?
> 
> 
> On 3 August 2016 at 10:23, tjw ietf <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> Happy HTTP folks
>> 
>> This draft came up in Buenos Aires and there was interest in the group from
>> contributing.  I was double booked in Berlin and wasn't able to attend, but
>> mnot politely reminded me about this.
>> 
>> The draft went through adoption and has been adopted by DNSOP.  It's still
>> can be worked on, and any and all comments on the ideas etc would be happily
>> accepted.
>> 
>> thanks
>> tim
>> 
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Tim Wicinski <[e-mail]>
>> Date: Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 6:33 PM
>> Subject: Call for Adoption: draft-song-dns-wireformat-http
>> To: dnsop <[e-mail]>
>> 
>> 
>> This starts an official Call for Adoption for
>>         draft-song-dns-wireformat-http
>> 
>> The draft is available here:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-song-dns-wireformat-http/
>> 
>> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by
>> DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.
>> 
>> Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.
>> 
>> We wanted this Call to coincide with the Berlin meeting so if there is
>> opinions that needed to be voiced, they can do so.
>> 
>> This call for adoption ends: 25 July 2016
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> tim wicinski
>> DNSOP co-chair
>> 
> 

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