Hi Paul, It sounds reasonable as we discussed before.
Best regards, Davey On 26 March 2018 at 13:48, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@icann.org> wrote: > Given the use case in draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-wireformat-http, defining a > new media type seems like overkill, particularly given that it will be > transporting *the exact same* data as an existing media type. Instead, an > optional parameter could be added to the application/dns-udpwireformat > registration in the DOH document. > > Proposal: > > ===== > > In the media type definition, change "Optional parameters" to: > > Optional parameters: original_transport > original_transport has two defined values, "udp" and "tcp". > This is only expected to be used by servers. > > Also in the the DOH document, under Operational Considerations, we would > add: > > This protocol does not define any use for the original_transport optional > parameter of the application/dns-udpwireformat media type. > > ===== > > Then draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-wireformat-http could define the use of that > optional parameter as it sees fit. > > --Paul Hoffman > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
