On Mon, 20 Oct 2014, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:04:14AM -0400,
Paul Wouters <[email protected]> wrote
a message of 80 lines which said:
And all the mentioned proposals for dns privacy already include
encryption in one way or the other.
I clearly disagree. At least two other documented (in Internet-Drafts)
proposals do not use encryption at all:
* QNAME minimisation
* Local (on the end user's machine) resolvers with cache
Both minimise data sent upstream, the first leg of data privacy (the
second being encryption: you need two legs to walk).
See RFC 6973, section 6.1
You take me comment a bit out of context. After reducing the use of
dnscurve to "some form of encryption", I meant to say we have various
other proposals for that already without the problems of dnscurve.
I did not mean to refer that all dnspriv work had to be about
encryption.
Paul
_______________________________________________
dns-privacy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
