I am not in favor of adoption of this document.
This document asserts that there “operational considerations” and at
the same time identifies technical deficiencies that suggest there is
protocol development work that needs to be done.
I don’t think ADoT exists. I think most of the parts are available to
“build” it. However, given that there are technical gaps, I don’t
see how this document represents operational considerations. It is much
better suited to motivating the development of ADoT, if that’s
something we want to do.
Jim
On 14 Aug 2019, at 16:40, Brian Haberman wrote:
This starts a Call for Adoption for
draft-hal-adot-operational-considerations
The draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hal-adot-operational-considerations/
Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for
adoption
by DPRIVE, and comment to the list, clearly stating your view.
Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review,
etc.
This call for adoption ends: 28 August 2019
Thanks,
Brian & Tim
_______________________________________________
dns-privacy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
_______________________________________________
dns-privacy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
