On Oct 22, 2014, at 1:08 PM, Paul Ferguson <[email protected]> wrote:
> I would also like to express my concern on the similar issues that Vix > expressed here, but perhaps a dprive "implementation and architecture" > document would be a good idea? The charter says: The Working Group will also develop an evaluation document to provide methods for measuring the performance against pervasive monitoring; and how well the goal is met. The Working Group will also develop a document providing example assessments for common use cases. To me, this fits what you are asking for, yes? (Note that PaulV indicated earlier that he had not been reading the list, and therefore might not have read the charter.) > I am afraid that this efforts gets too far down the path before > realizing how some implementation of the "privacy path" before realizing > that the scheme breaks things like passive DNS collection. Passive DNS collection is done at recursive and authoritative servers. How would encryption between the stub and its upstream recursive affect the ability to collect passive DNS data? --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
