I am in favour of adoption,
Neil
> On 22 Jan 2023, at 20:36, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
>
> All
>
> The chairs have received feedback for DNSOP to adopt this document, and I've
> wrestled with this document.We have received feedback when presented
> to adopt this work. We've also had some co
be authoritative for some zones, it can
use that configuration to actually be authoritative for the addresses on which
it responds.” Which seems to contradict the previous MUST NOT - surely this is
an implementation detail that should not be mentioned in an IETF draft?
Neil Cook
> On 19 A
progressing
this, and I think ensuring that it works for the extremely widely deployed
use-case of a DNS proxy/forwarder is very important.
Neil
> On 11 Oct 2019, at 14:41, Neil Cook wrote:
>
> I have some comments on this draft.
>
> I’m particularly concerned about the extre
me and (b) is a separate objective from
> this draft. I think it's just...unrelated. I don't think we have DNS
> hop-by-hop -type semantics, which would make the discovery of intermediate
> resolvers/forwarders easier.
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 9:03 AM Neil Cook <
y deployed
> use-case of a DNS proxy/forwarder is very important.
>
> Neil
>
> > On 11 Oct 2019, at 14:41, Neil Cook > <mailto:neil.c...@noware.co.uk>> wrote:
> >
> > I have some comments on this draft.
> >
> > I’m particularly concerned abo
> On 29 Oct 2019, at 23:04, Paul Wouters wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 Oct 2019, Neil Cook wrote:
>
>> FWIW, I've previously stated a preference for dropping the use of
>> ".well-known" entirely, and using draft-00's "resolver-info.arpa&quo
Hi Eric,
> So this leads back to, if we don't pull the DNS-provided error message into
> the UI, what does this new draft give us that EDE doesn't or how should this
> work alongside EDE? And does this provide enough value and solve enough of
> the problem for resolvers to implement if the clie
expanded to provide other
types of client ID than just mac address and IP, for example a host name.
Neil Cook
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>> ISTM that it is quite possible that enterprises that deploy their own DoH
>> services could potentially reduce such leakage and gain overall. (I'm
>> assuming here that sensible browser-makers will end up providing
>> something that works for browsers running in networks with split-horizon
>> se
> On 12 Mar 2019, at 16:36, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 08:55:18AM +0530,
> nalini elkins wrote
> a message of 202 lines which said:
>
>> The questions that the Fortune 50 company architect asked were something
>> like this:
>>
>> 1. You mean that DNS could be re
> On 12 Mar 2019, at 17:01, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 04:55:11PM +0100,
> Neil Cook wrote
> a message of 22 lines which said:
>
>> Actually many enterprises (particularly banks etc.) do not allow DNS
>> resolution directly from
11 matches
Mail list logo
