Subject: [dns-privacy] Please review draft-ietf-dprive-dns-over-tls-02.txt - responses to WGLC

From: "Mankin, Allison" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 00:02:34 +0000

Draft-ietf-dprive-dns-over-tls-02 is out and ready for re-review (and
maybe for a second WGLC - Tim, please considerŠ)

Mail from yesterday (now with a clearer subject line).

On 12/7/15, 11:04 AM, "Mankin, Allison" <[email-masked]> wrote:

>We have updated the DNS-over-TLS draft to provide a complete response to
>two aspects of the WGLC
>
>1. the WG consensus call from the discussion that took place in Yokohama
>(2 weeks into the 4 week WGLC)
>2. the discussion on the mailing list - this mostly took the form of
>questions about that consensus.
>  
>
>Warren summed up the WG consensus call (on the mailing list on 11/13):
>
>On 11/13/15, 12:55 PM, "dns-privacy on behalf of Warren Kumari"
><[email-masked] on behalf of [email-masked]> wrote:
>
>>The plan that we'd discussed was that this document would describe how
>>to do the DNSoTLS bit, and the new document would extend the auth
>>profiles.
>>
>>This document would mention opportunistic and the case where there is
>>an existing trust relationship.
>>
>>The refernce to the new document would not have to be normative, and
>>so we could go ahead and publish this - we've heard (anecdotally) that
>>a number of people would like to test this, but would like to see the
>>RFC label before spending cycles...
>
>
>We addressed both 1 and 2 by providing more details about the the case
>where there is an existing trust relationship.  We point to the soon to be
>submitted document for TLS and DTLS that will provide additional
>authentication methods and profiles with a TBD informative reference to be
>filled in with the draft name once it appears (Section 1).
>
>We expanded on the existing trust relationship case by specifying
>out-of-band pinned-key authentication analogous to the authentication
>described in RFC 7469 (and noting that additional authentication methods
>are to come in the TLS/DTLS authentication draft).  These changes
>primarily occur in Section 4.2, but also in in the profiles intro (Section
>4). Also, we added a non-normative appendix with an example of pinned-key
>authentication.  
>
>Please check the diff (Diff:
>https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dprive-dns-over-tls-02) to
>get a clear picture of these changes.
>
>We request that folks read the changed sections asap.  We request to the
>chairs that they start a new two week WGLC for review of this response to
>the first WGLC.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Allison
>
>