> On Apr 28, 2017, at 9:23 AM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> 
>> That also implies that this service cannot be defined as valid for any
>> service that isn't already assigned. That would effectively be squatting
>> on the entire port space.
> 
> I don't think i understand what you're saying here.  The document is
> about how a server can distinguish between existing versions of DNS and
> existing versions of HTTP.  it's not making any claims about any other
> service.  are you suggesting that it is making such a claim?

I'm saying that the statement that it works now is just that.

It can't be a standard. It can't be a bcp. I don't see how it can be a WG doc 
outside of HTTPbis.

IMO it falls under the "hazard to the Internet" part where it might not even 
qualify as a valid individual submission.

Joe


_______________________________________________
dns-privacy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy

Reply via email to