Moin!
On 27 Jun 2019, at 20:44, Paul Hoffman wrote:
Greetings. We have again updated draft-sah-resolver-information based
on comments from this mailing list. We think that this is ready for
adoption by the WG so that the initial use of the protocol (to be able
to determine the URI template of the DoH server preferred by your
current resolver) can move forward as well.
Couple of questions/remarks that may have been asked/answered (but are
not discussed in the draft thus I’m asking).
- The draft offers two methods of retrieving the object but says nothing
about which is mandatory (Me being a lazy DNS geek will certainly not
put a web server on my DNS server so won’t implement 3). Will it still
work? Why?
- In section 3 there is the mention of the DOMAINNAMEOFRESOLVER. I have
no idea how any API/Interface for DNS resolvers offers the ability to
enter a name. So where does it come from? If there is no such thing
should we not remove it from the draft.
- The biggest issue IMHO are RFC1918 and IPv6 link local addresses as
these are mostly used in homes for DNS resolver addresses. This means
that the CPE - who usually is a DNS Forwarder has to answer (and
understand) this query and either forward or answer by himself. DNS
Proxies might not implement RFC3597. Should there be a fallback (TXT)?
So long
-Ralf
—--
Ralf Weber
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
