> > But it is completely unrelated to this working group: whatever ICANN > > decides on this matter, the DNS will leak information (and we are here > > to limit this leak: let me remind you that qname minimisation is > > currently in Working Group Last Call in dnsop). > > +1. If you want to have a constructive discussion about this topic that has > some chance of changing the outcome, you should probably do it in ICANN, > not in an unrelated WG in the IETF.
I agree about ICANN decision that not relates to this group but not about DNS privacy where directly relates to privacy of user . My note had two messages that ICANN decision only is a part of that but the important part of it is that what are the privacy concerns of data processing and/or information that are stored in a DNS server (with different RRtypes) At the moment this group only focused on (to some extend) the privacy of a particular end user (but not all as domain owners can be also an end user) . In other word, the privacy of DNS server and data that are stored in the DNS server. DNS is an IETF protocol. RRs are all defined at IETF. If some sensitive data are not stored in DNS server in a form of different RRtypes, then the decision of ICANN would not have any impact on users' privacy. Hosnieh BTW,I didn't follow the discussion on this qname minimization draft but if it is about minimizing data kept in DNS server, then that is a good start. _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
