I read this and support it moving forward, it's good
enough as-is.

But I also have two nits and two questions:-)

- 4.5 still has a "TODO:"

- Section 5: I think the numbered list might be better if
you added a "(0) This only applies if you're encrypting."
RFC 7830 does say you MUST NOT pad if the transport is
not encrypting but it might be worth saying it here too.

- Is there any (good) literature on related mechanisms
that one might use to further increase the difficulties
of traffic analysis based on DNS traffic? I'm thinking
about synthetic cover traffic or of adding jitter to
the timing of requests, but there could be other things
one might do. Even if we aren't in a position to provide
experimental recommendations about such things, (I'd be
happy if we were), it'd be good to at least add a mention
and some references if we could. While such work could
be done later and in a separate specification, it is
pretty closely related to this so would also fit nicely
in here if we had good text to add. (I don't have text
to offer, sorry.)

- There's no way to know (for sure) which padding scheme
a peer is using I think? If so, would there be any
benefit in making that possible? I think the answer is
that's there's not enough to gain by doing so. If there
were then one could indicate that via some padding octets
I guess, even though that's pretty hacky.

Cheers,
S.

On 22/01/18 13:29, Brian Haberman wrote:
> All,
>      This message starts a two week WG Last Call on advancing:
> 
>         Title           : Padding Policy for EDNS(0)
>         Author          : Alexander Mayrhofer
>       Filename        : draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-03.txt
>       Pages           : 9
>       Date            : 2018-01-17
> 
> as an Experimental document. The last call will end on February 5, 2018.
> All substantive comments are to be sent to the mailing list for
> discussions. Editorial comments can be sent to the document editor.
> 
> Regards,
> Brian & Tim
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dns-privacy mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
> 

-- 
PGP key change time for me.
New-ID 7B172BEA; old-ID 805F8DA2 expires Jan 24 2018.
NewWithOld sigs in keyservers.
Sorry if that mucks something up;-)

Attachment: 0x7B172BEA.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

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

Reply via email to