On Nov 2, 2014, at 12:57 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email protected]> wrote: > > A reviewer told me privately that it is not clear, from > draft-ietf-dprive-problem-statement-00.txt, what are the actual > considerations/issues/problems. They are mentioned but not highlighted > enough, he said.
I did not have the problem that that reviewer did, but WGs in the past have had problems with "the problem statement document indicates X" vs. "it doesn't say that". > He suggested to add prominent CONSIDERATIONS from time to time, for > instance when discussing source IP addresses, having: > > CONSIDERATION NNN: "exposing source IP addresses of DNS queries raises > privacy risks" > > Advice? My preference is not to have three categories, but just one: problems. Problems are issues, and problems have considerations, but what the WG needs is a list of problems that it needs to try to solve. --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
