Rob On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 8:40 AM Robert Wilton via Datatracker < [email protected]> wrote:
> Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-06: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Hi, > > Thank you for this document. I found it interesting and easy to read. > > A few minor comments/nits that I spotted whilst reading this document: > > "in clear (i.e., unencrypted)." => "unencrypted." > "However there is" => "However, there is" > "designed for TCP, not UDP and new" => "designed for TCP, not UDP, and new" > "It can be noted also that" => "It can also be noted that" > "Both are a big privacy concern" => "Both are significant privacy concerns" > "de-NAT DNS queries dns-de-nat [3]" => "de-NAT DNS queries [3]"? > > Thanks for these - the last one appears to be a markdown reference fail. I'll make sure it's worked out thanks tim > Regards, > Rob > > > >
_______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
