Paul Hoffman wrote: > Greetings again. As y'all have seen over the past few weeks, the > discussion of where DNS resolution should happen and over what > transports has caused some people to use conflicting terms. As a > possible solution to the terminology problems, I am proposing a few > abbreviations that people can use in these discussions. The draft > below, if adopted by the DNSOP WG, would update RFC 8499 with a small > set of abbreviations.
I would like to boldly suggest to not or at least not only define abbreviations but proper names for the more general concepts instead. The ship has probably sailed for the protocols itself and they will now forever be DoH and DoT, but maybe we can agree on something more meaningful such as "traditional [name] resolution" v. "alternative [name] resolution" for the what the draft calls DaT and DaO. The reasoning here is that proper terms are less confusing and, if chosen wisely, can be understood by someone not intimately familiar with the matter. When speaking, they aren’t much more bothersome than the abbreviation. Writing will be a bit more work but then again, an extra layer of clarity can help with avoiding misunderstanding. I will spare you my aesthetic concerns around camel-case abbreviations. Kind regards, Mar*shudder*tin _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
