On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 02:58:09AM -0400, Tim Wicinski <[email protected]> wrote a message of 28 lines which said:
> This starts a Working Group Last Call for: > draft-ietf-dprive-dtls-and-tls-profile Executive summary: OK for me, draft-ietf-dprive-dtls-and-tls-profiles-03 can (and should) be published. I find that touchy issues, such as the relationship with the authentication mechanisms described in RFC 7858, or such as the table 1 "DNS Privacy Protection by Usage Profile and type of attacker" are nicely done. The table 1 could use some details about the possibility of detection for passive attacks (for active attacks, it is addressed in section 5). These details were promised in <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/8VMIuFKWZUAzP7UWivLn9fA_Ew4> :-) Technical question: The document seems to use "X.509" and "PKIX" as synonyms. Is it really the case? Small legal detail: > this application [extended to be used for recursive clients and > authoritative servers] is out of scope for the DNS PRIVate Exchange > (DPRIVE) Working Group per its current charter. A bit exaggerated: the current charter says "it [the DPRIVE WG] may also later consider mechanisms that provide confidentiality between Iterative Resolvers and Authoritative Servers" Editorial detail: > but may be the subject of a future I-D. Should probably be removed before it becomes a RFC. _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
