> -----Original Message----- > From: dns-privacy <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Brian > Haberman > Sent: Monday, April 19, 2021 5:13 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [dns-privacy] How do we want to use draft-ietf-dprive- > phase2-requirements? > > All, > As was raised on the thread discussing suggestions for the requirements > draft, there is some question on how the WG wants to use draft-ietf-dprive- > phase2-requirements in progressing our recursive-to-authoritative privacy > work item. The draft currently has one sub-section that describes > requirements (5.1) and another section that describes optional features > (5.2), albeit with 2119 SHOULDs. > > My question to the WG is how do we want to use this draft? I see four > possible approaches, but I am sure someone will point out others. > > 1. Strictly requirements - these would be MUST-level functions that the WG > determines have to be supported by any solutions draft. > > 2. Strictly design considerations - these would be functional areas that the > WG determines need to be considered, but not necessarily included, by any > solutions draft. > > 3. Requirements & design considerations - This is generally where the current > draft sits IMO. > > 4. Drop the draft and let the solutions flow. > > Let's discuss the focus of the draft and then we can determine what updates > are needed/necessary.
I prefer option #3, but with a change in order such that we describe design considerations first, followed by requirements that are derived from those considerations. Scott _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
