I oppose adoption. For precisely the same reasons that Tomas lays out below,
Neil > On 18 Mar 2021, at 12:02, Tomas Krizek <[email protected]> wrote: > > I oppose adoption. > > The draft introduces huge amount of additional complexity, both for > implementors and operators of DoH. This raises the bar for both smaller > vendors and operators, thus leading to more centralization. > > Additionally, the problem it attempts to solve is not DoH-specific, or > even DNS-specific, yet it only provides a solution for DoH. > > On 17/03/2021 14.00, Brian Haberman 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/). >> 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] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy >> > > -- > Tomas Krizek > PGP: 4A8B A48C 2AED 933B D495 C509 A1FB A5F7 EF8C 4869 > > _______________________________________________ > 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
