Hi Jim,
On 31/03/2021 14:32, Jim Reid wrote:
On 31 Mar 2021, at 14:05, Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email protected]> wrote: RFC 7626 (the threat model and problem analysis that some people claim is missing) is clear (section 2.5.2 for instance).Stephane, RFC7626 is 6 years old. It predates the DoH and DoT (andsoon DoQ) specs.
RFC7626 was IMO quite important in enabling those later protocols, so that age and sequence are signs of success.
Some other risks have changed since 2015 too. It’s not your fault that fine RFC has been OBE. :-)
I'm not sure what point you're making there tbh, but I don't believe 7626 is OBE when it comes to considering privacy issues arising from interactions between recursives and TLDs, which is a big part of what we're discussing here I hope. Cheers, S.
OpenPGP_0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
