On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 4:38 AM Jakob Bohm via bind-users <bind-users@lists.isc.org> wrote: > Having the DoH server as a standalone process talking to DNS/TCP would > be a solid implementation given the constant flow of changes made to > HTTP(S) by the Big 5.
Perhaps, but for reference here is the relevant section of the DoH spec: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8484#section-5.2 HTTP/2 [RFC7540] is the minimum RECOMMENDED version of HTTP for use with DoH. The messages in classic UDP-based DNS [RFC1035] are inherently unordered and have low overhead. A competitive HTTP transport needs to support reordering, parallelism, priority, and header compression to achieve similar performance. Those features were introduced to HTTP in HTTP/2 [RFC7540]. Earlier versions of HTTP are capable of conveying the semantic requirements of DoH but may result in very poor performance. That ISC has chosen to follow the minimum HTTP version as recommended by the RFC is solid ground on which to be standing. -- tale -- Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information. bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
