Subject: [Doh] WGLC on draft-ietf-doh-dns-over-https

From: Ben Schwartz <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 15:07:35 -0400

All,
This message starts a two week WG Last Call on advancing:

  Title           : DNS Queries over HTTPS
  Author          : Paul Hoffman, Patrick McManus
  Filename        : draft-ietf-doh-dns-over-https-07
  Pages           : 17
  Date            : 2018-04-11

as a Standards Track document. The last call will end on May 2, 2018.
All substantive comments are to be sent to the [email-masked] list for
discussions. Editorial comments can be sent to the document editor.

You can find the latest version of the document here:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-doh-dns-over-https-07

Regards,
Ben & tale

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:24:18 +1000

Hmm, it's quiet.  I don't know if that means that we all think that
this is done or not.

I've reviewed the draft and I think that it's almost there.  I have
three issues to raise with the group, shown below.

The proceeds of that review can be seen on GitHub in the form of
issues and pull requests.  The pull requests are mostly trivial
editorial matters and can be resolved on GitHub.

Truncated responses
https://github.com/dohwg/draft-ietf-doh-dns-over-https/issues/161

Do we still need Section 3?
https://github.com/dohwg/draft-ietf-doh-dns-over-https/issues/148

Does the HTTP freshness lifetime need to match the TTL?
https://github.com/dohwg/draft-ietf-doh-dns-over-https/issues/153

I'm happy to start threads on each of these for discussion.

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 5:07 AM, Ben Schwartz <[email-masked]> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Doh mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/doh
>

---

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 15:28:57 +1000

Hi,

Overall, this looks good. One issue:

"The minimum version of HTTP used by DOH SHOULD be HTTP/2 [RFC7540]."

SHOULD is too strong here, and "used by DOH" is ambiguous. Suggest:

"DNS API clients and servers should support, but not require, the use of HTTP/2 [RFC7540]."

Cheers,

> On 19 Apr 2018, at 5:07 am, Ben Schwartz <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> All,

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