On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 3:53 PM Christian Huitema <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 3/6/2020 7:30 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > > > Thank you for continuing this interesting work. However, a reader might > not realize that many other folks would prefer DNS/HTTPS/QUIC until the get > all the way to Section 3.4. Also, the title of that section seems a bit > unbalanced, given that the text says that people might prefer > DNS/HTTPS/QUIC for reasons other than hiding from firewalls. > > > > For a future version of this draft, please consider moving the > comparison to DNS/HTTPS/QUIC, and the discussion of not knowing which one > folks will prefer, up to the Introduction. That would leave Section 3.4 > just about the stated design goal. > > Yes. I would like to end up with just a spec, and leave the discussion > about DoT vs DoQ vs DoH vs DoH3 to some other document... > The introduction says: "DNS over QUIC (DoQ) has privacy properties similar to DNS over TLS (DoT) specified in RFC7858, and performance characteristics similar to classic DNS over UDP." I think you might want to drop this text on performance characteristics, since it seems to imply DNS over UDP has better performance characteristics. At least for DoH, some data seems to show that it vastly outperforms DNS over UDP after the 80th percentile of latency, while being just slightly slower below the 80th percentile. Source: https://youtu.be/_ZoyxE0bLp8?t=4839 (Ekr talk at DNS-OARC). thanks, Rob
_______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
