Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dprive-edns0-padding-02: Yes
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dprive-edns0-padding/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - intro: "significantly hampering" is over-stated, even though you do limit that to size-based correlation as a form of traffic analysis. This is a basic mechanism (a fine thing) but by itself does not counter traffic analysis that much. See e.g. [1] for a relevant study. Referencing [1] and/or [2] and saying that this mechanism isn't itself enough would be a good improvement. ([2] is a colleague's work btw, but I think is good:-). Neither [1] nor [2] are DNS-specific, not sure if there are publications that cover that. Without such a caveat, people might over-claim and not do the right things. Happy to help craft words for that if you want. [1] http://kpdyer.com/publications/oakland2012-peekaboo.pdf [2] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1410.2087v2.pdf - typo: "meta data of could still" _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
