As an author, I support adoption as experimental. To Paul’s email, I also am quite happy to have change control governed by the WG.
To the OHTTP discussion, I’m fine with having the direction be to use OHTTP for ODoH, but I personally believe that even in the best case, the timelines and deployment considerations make it more practical to have an experimental ODoH ship prior to a version that uses OHTTP. Best, Tommy > On Mar 17, 2021, at 6:45 AM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: > > I believe this document should be adopted with a target status of Experimental > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 6:00 AM Brian Haberman <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > All, > This starts a DPRIVE WG call for adoption for > draft-pauly-dprive-oblivious-doh > (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pauly-dprive-oblivious-doh/ > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pauly-dprive-oblivious-doh/>). > Please reply to the mailing list with your views (positive or negative) > on the WG adopting the document and your supporting arguments. > > This call will end on March 31, 2021 at 11:59pm UTC. > > Regards, > Brian & Tim > > _______________________________________________ > dns-privacy mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy> > _______________________________________________ > 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
