On 01/04/2019 07:19, Alexander Mayrhofer wrote:
> I have some experience in creating drafts for "funny" EDNS0-options
> (RFC7830), so I'd volunteer :-P
Actually, that maybe raises a point. If use of DoT to secure
recursive to authoritative traffic also requires padding (and
I can't see why that's different from the stub-recursive
situation), then presumably deployment of this EDNS0-option is
needed in any case, so does that imply that a new option for
signalling would actually be just as practical, in deployment
terms?

Cheers,
S.

Attachment: 0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
dns-privacy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy

Reply via email to