Subject: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet-04.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 14:28:37 -0700

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations Working Group of the IETF.

        Title           : Client Subnet in DNS Queries
        Authors         : Carlo Contavalli
                          Wilmer van der Gaast
                          David C Lawrence
                          Warren Kumari
	Filename        : draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet-04.txt
	Pages           : 29
	Date            : 2015-09-25

Abstract:
   This draft defines an EDNS0 extension to carry information about the
   network that originated a DNS query, and the network for which the
   subsequent response can be cached.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet-04

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet-04

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Warren Kumari <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 18:20:32 -0400

This update cleans up some of the text, and makes it clearer that this
documents an *existing* protocol.

Ted Hardie also requested that we add:

 If we were just beginning to design this mechanism, and not
   documenting existing protocol, it is unlikely that we would have done
   things exactly this way.

   The IETF is actively working on enhancing DNS privacy [3], and the
   re-injection of metadata has been identified as a problematic design
   pattern [4].

   As noted above, however, this document primarily describes existing
   behavior of a deployed method, to further the understanding of the
   Internet community.

   We encourage the deployment of means to allow users to make use of
   the opt-out provided.  We also recommend that others avoid techniques
   that may introduce additional metadata in future work, as it may
   damage user trust.

Which, after discussions with the chairs[0 and Ted], we have done....

W

[0]: To make it flow better with the rest of the text, not because we
disagree with the idea...

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 5:28 PM,  <[email-masked]> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf