On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 01:54:12PM +0000, Prashanth Patil (praspati) <[email protected]> wrote a message of 61 lines which said:
> The new revision addresses comments received on the list and @IETF-95. My review of -07 : I see no reason not to move it to WG last call. Technical : > DNS client can use the authenication mechanisms discussed in > [I-D.ietf-dprive-dtls-and-tls-profiles] > DNSoD client and server can use DTLS heartbeat [RFC6520] In both cases, the language of RFC 2119 is not used. Is it on purpose? Editorial: s/authenication/authentication/ Random thoughts: Now, a stub resolver may have to try four things (UDP/53, TCP/53, UDP+DTLS/853 and TCP+TLS/853, all on the Standards track) before communicating with a resolver. Should we write a meta-document, with operational guidance, on how this could be done? _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
