On Apr 3, 2018, at 2:58 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thom...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If I understand your response (not sure that I do), that seems pretty > academic and not at all persuasive.
....to you. It was persuasive enough for the DNSOP WG to adopt the document as a WG item. > For instance, if a client cared > about testing TCP capabilities, it can always do its own resolution. That's not what draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-wireformat-http is about. Martin: Are you saying that you want DOH to remove the optional parameter from the application/dns-udpwireformat registration? If so, what do you propose for the DNSOP WG? --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
