Not in any way to stop this specific draft, I wonder if this is a more general principle of exercising code points which are not marked "never to be used" and should also be raised cross-area, or in another place?
Maybe the best path is to get this proved here, and then embrace-extend. I tend not to what-if the downsides, but I can imagine there would be an initially high rate of failure which causes log flows, threat analysis feeds and some consequent damage. That would have to be a "lesson learned" and then we pass through to a better understanding of which bits in a header are mutable and should not be tested as fixed value fields. Nice, small draft. -G On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 10:29 AM Shumon Huque <shu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi folks, > > Mark Andrews and I have submitted a new draft on 'Greasing Protocol Extension > Points in the DNS'. > > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-huque-dnsop-grease-00.html > > (datatracker link: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-huque-dnsop-grease/ ) > > We'd like to see if there is interest in working on this. On list and > in-person (IETF119/Brisbane) discussion welcome. > > Shumon (and Mark). > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
