Hi,

Not necessarily reacting on the re-charter text discussion, but trying
to clear-out some potential misunderstanding (with me maybe?).

On 04/07/2018 12:28 AM, Ian Maddison wrote:
> Solid stub to recursive and qnamemin standards have been established but
> currently bind is the only performant DoT system and they've only
> recently announced work on qname minimalisation. 

For information to the WG, Unbound and Knot Resolver have implemented
DNS-over-TLS for one or two years now, and both are in use.  Also qname
minimalisation has been implemented in Unbound and Knot Resolver for 2
years already, and the feature is used by operators.

An other DNS-over-TLS solution is PowerDNS recursor in combination with
dnsdist; and in a similar way, BIND setups are a combination with NGINX
or HAProxy.

All solutions above are stable performant DNS-over-TLS implementations.
The open-source developers of all DNS resolvers mentioned above are
actively engaged and work closely together to secure interoperability.

> I see a lot of effort going into outreach but it still still seems like
> the general public and journalists have yet to catch on to the scale and
> breadth of this DNS problem, while the engineering community may have
> lost some of their initial momentum.

Only speaking for the open-source DNS implementers, this is certainly
not the case.  We all invest substantial time in the continued
development of DNS privacy features/functionality in our software.

Best regards,

-- Benno

-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

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

Reply via email to