On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 7:11 AM Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Il 08/01/2020 14:12 Rob Sayre <sayrer@xxxxxxxxx> ha scritto:
I think the concept you're describing is covered by RFC8484, as I wrote.
Is there something in this document's DoH considerations that's new?But basically every DNS RFC from the past few years (e.g. the DoT ones) already has a privacy considerations section or discusses privacy issues. The point of RFC 7626, of which this draft is an update, was to provide the entire analysis in a single document. So why was RFC 7626 made then? Under your logic, it would not make sense to have it at all - but now we have it, and we are stuck with an obsolete version unless we update it.
RFC 7626 doesn't normatively reference any protocol documents other than the original DNS RFCs, which do not have privacy or security considerations sections.
It would be better to include more of this content by reference, or by quoting the DoT and DoH RFCs directly.
thanks,
Rob
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
