> On 28 Nov 2019, at 20:33, Brian Trammell via Datatracker <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Reviewer: Brian Trammell > Review result: Ready with Nits
Brian, Thanks for the review! > > This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's > ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written > primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's > authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF > discussion list for information. > > When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this > review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC > [email protected] if you reply to or forward this review. > > This draft is ready for publication from a transport point of view. I have > minor nits / suggestions: > > (1) References to QUIC imply that work is underway to build DNS over QUIC; > while this has been suggested, there is to my knowledge no ongoing > specification or implementation of such an application. There should be some > additional text pointing out this context where QUIC is first mentioned. A specification for DNS-over-QUIC was actually started in April 2017 and is still active: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-huitema-quic-dnsoquic/ but is, of course, somewhat held up because version 1.0 of QUIC will only support HTTP. I thought there was a reference to this but you are correct - it isn’t in there! I will add it in the introduction immediately after the referance to I-D.ietf-quic-transport. FYI - I am aware of work on a prototype implementation on and off since then and there was experimental work to implement it in a DNS benchmarking tool at the IETF 105 hackathon: https://github.com/DNS-OARC/flamethrower/tree/dns-over-quic > > (2) The references have some typos (e.g. [pitfalls-of-dns-encrption]) and are > occasionally oddly named (e.g. [firefox] for a Mozilla announcement about > DoH); > suggest reviewing these. Suggest (if these references remain): [chrome] -> [chrome-doh-experiment] (article is titled “"Experimenting with same-provider DNS-over-HTTPS upgrade”) [firefox] -> [mozilla-doh-as-default] (article is titled “What's next in making Encrypted DNS-over- HTTPS the Default” [pitfalls-of-dns-encrption] -> [pitfalls-of-dns-encryption] The rest look OK (I think) or have the same names as in the original RFC.... Sara. _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
