The irony to the privacy and client-id discussion is that we have another “DNS Privacy” WG which gives me wonderful ID from the crypto termination on the resolver.
The reality with client ID is just like RPZ adoption. Operators need flexibility to face reality. If the DNSOP’s choice is to not face reality, so be it. The code will still get deployed. Operators will still drive adoption. The choice is to have client ID and RPZ in the working group process.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
