Section 9.1 of draft-ietf-dprive-phase2-requirements currently contains this 
text:

"As recursors typically forwards queries received from the user to 
authoritative servers.  This creates a transitive trust between the user and 
the recursor, as well as the authoritative server, since information created by 
the user is exposed to the authoritative server.  However, the user never has a 
chance to identify what data was exposed to which authoritative party (via 
which path).

Also, Users would want to be informed about the status of the connections which 
were made on their behalf, which adds a fourth point

Encryption/privacy status signaling

*TODO*: Actual requirements - what do users "want"?  Start below:"

I'm not sure there's much to be added here since users currently have no 
ability to pick and choose services that a recursive resolver negotiates with 
an authoritative name server. The user can pick a recursive resolver based on 
the set of services it provides, and that's about it. I'd like to suggest that 
we replace the above text with something like the following:

"Recursive resolvers typically act as intermediaries.  They forward queries 
received from users to authoritative servers without any configurable and/or 
measurable interaction between the user and the authoritative name servers. As 
when making requests through other intermediaries, users do not necessarily 
have the ability to identify information that is disclosed by the intermediary 
to other service provider, i.e., an authoritative server in this case. As such,
users should simply choose a recursor that provides a set of services that best 
meets the user's need for information protection, along with other 
considerations."

Scott

_______________________________________________
dns-privacy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy

Reply via email to