What conflicting information?
On 08/21/2018 08:11 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
We aren’t even talking about the same thing. I’m talking about figuring
out whether we need to offer guidance for how a host implementation
would handle conflicting information and, if so, what guidance to
offer. You are talking about one of a number of different ways of
configuring DoT.
On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 11:04 PM Doug Barton <do...@dougbarton.us
<mailto:do...@dougbarton.us>> wrote:
On 08/21/2018 05:48 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 12:59 AM, Doug Barton
<do...@dougbarton.us <mailto:do...@dougbarton.us>
> <mailto:do...@dougbarton.us <mailto:do...@dougbarton.us>>> wrote:
>
> You, like Ted, are looking at the problem the wrong way 'round.
>
> And this, in a nutshell, is why this discussion has gone on so long.
> If you just caricature what the people you're conversing with say,
> then it's inevitably going to go like this:
[ Snipped a bunch of arguments I didn't make ]
> This is why discussions balloon in the IETF. So now I have the
choice
> of either being silenced, or continuing to be Person A in this
charade.
> I think I've spoken my peace. If you want to proceed with
this work,
> please do not be surprised if, when the call for adoption comes,
I come
> in and say "I raised substantive objections to this, which were not
> addressed, so please do not take this on as a working group item."
Ted,
While I'm not concerned about the issues you raised in your caricature,
I feel that I have tried to engage you in your discussion of different
security models. My understanding is that your models devolve down to
two. Either the user configures a resolver themselves (whether it's
DOH/DOT or not), and user doesn't configure a resolver themselves. I
recognize the distinction you made between your models 1 and 3, and
further recognize that it's extremely important to some people. My
point
is that *from the standpoint of a DHCP option for DOH/DOT* it's not
relevant.
From our discussion, it seems that you're in agreement with me
that if
a user isn't configuring a resolver explicitly that they are no worse
off with DOH/DOT than they are without it. Am I right so far?
Meanwhile, you've also voiced an opinion that the presence of a DHCP
option implies some sort of endorsement by the IETF. I (and others)
replied that we've never heard of this, and disagree strongly with your
position.
So other than the fact that we disagree on the endorsement issue, what
am I missing here?
Doug
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org <mailto:DNSOP@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
