DoT and DoH seem fine. But maybe skip the acronym for Do53 - just call it conventional DNS or unencrypted DNS, or DNS over Port 53. Compared to RDoT/ADoT/DaT/DaO however, Do53 is the least offensive IMO.
I don’t think you do much for clarity with RDoT and ADoT - seems mostly to be used because you want more acronyms. ;-) For RDoT this is the stub/client to recursive DoT link of the lookup chain. This is client-to-recursive (C2R DoT? Ha!), whereas ADoT is the recursive server performing recursion to a series of authoritative servers - recursion-to-authoritatives (R2A DoT? Acronym overkill achieved.) So I think those need some work. I find DaT and DaO rather confusing. I feel like you may be trying too hard on acronyms and these will become very difficult for others to understand. Really the difference is between network-assigned DNS, user-assigned DNS, and client-assigned DNS - so 3 separate primary use cases of assignment of your resolver. I would maybe focus on the difference between the manner of assignment/configuration and not worry too much (at least for now) over some sort of acronym, since it seems at this early stage of discussions that the acronym may cause more confusion that more straightforward (but longer) terms. I think you could also add definitions for Centralised (Recursive) Do53/DoH/DoT, as well as Distributed (Recursive) Do53/DoH/DoT. This refers to how widely distributed or centralized the group of operators of the recursives are or are not. I took a stab at that definition in my draft you could work from if you wish. Jason _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop