Re: [Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-03

Sara Dickinson <> Wed, 18 December 2019 13:43 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2985112003E; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 05:43:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-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 WjFieKahZAp6; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 05:43:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1098:0:82:1000:0:2:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9CEE1200D8; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 05:43:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; ; s=mythic-beasts-k1; h=To:Date:From:Subject; bh=wHpnFqIvrY2iCF7YaypVHQXUK0dDZukK2UXXQPP28dg=; b=kCCO8cA0NxBGA5V1VURLrpr+le EuREaFwsovTV6XvPQBy0gvrpDCZ5Jg9Y9imWgffPHw3HzdvbaaQjaCqy1d5cZat+gMTcaVx7TYPck ciFJ18qdRBf2nExeyK7gWkCgD2+1ql6HHYcyEPd8GSOyn3LkiAZtfF+Bn5IacmMyp0XdZz6pk+wo/ 1IaxvhhPG8iizeK6Pkj8GT8m4c0ukkd5ZVQSfkm9Q/53f6IntS9c1Iksftms8qOHpOf8NNdDhT/W/ 1YTyKL6+0ANn4w2oVvtPrCFefVyGvTHBOV4u87/AJgOSAqS6+45Q+ARvqa2v49PDCne93ngQJUQtM eq+V1z3A==;
Received: from [2001:b98:204:102:fffa::2] (port=51546) by with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from <>) id 1ihZbl-0004PD-5E; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 13:43:25 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: Sara Dickinson <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 13:43:14 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Brian Trammell <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: 4
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-03
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Review Team <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 13:43:30 -0000

> On 28 Nov 2019, at 20:33, Brian Trammell via Datatracker <> wrote:
> Reviewer: Brian Trammell
> Review result: Ready with Nits


Thanks for the review!

> This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's
> ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written
> primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's
> authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF
> discussion list for information.
> When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this
> review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC
> if you reply to or forward this review.
> This draft is ready for publication from a transport point of view. I have
> minor nits / suggestions:
> (1) References to QUIC imply that work is underway to build DNS over QUIC;
> while this has been suggested, there is to my knowledge no ongoing
> specification or implementation of such an application. There should be some
> additional text pointing out this context where QUIC is first mentioned.

A specification for DNS-over-QUIC was actually started in April 2017 and is still active:
but is, of course, somewhat held up because version 1.0 of QUIC will only support HTTP. I thought there was a reference to this but you are correct - it isn’t in there! I will add it in the introduction immediately after the referance to I-D.ietf-quic-transport.

FYI - I am aware of work on a prototype implementation on and off since then and there was experimental work to implement it in a DNS benchmarking tool at the IETF 105 hackathon:

> (2) The references have some typos (e.g. [pitfalls-of-dns-encrption]) and are
> occasionally oddly named (e.g. [firefox] for a Mozilla announcement about DoH);
> suggest reviewing these.

Suggest (if these references remain):

[chrome] -> [chrome-doh-experiment] (article is titled “"Experimenting with same-provider DNS-over-HTTPS upgrade”)
[firefox] -> [mozilla-doh-as-default]  (article is titled “What's next in making Encrypted DNS-over- HTTPS the Default”
[pitfalls-of-dns-encrption] -> [pitfalls-of-dns-encryption]

The rest look OK (I think) or have the same names as in the original RFC....