Greetings again. Based on the WG discussion of the last few weeks, we can see 
that the folks with the fully-authenticated use case do not yet agree on a 
signaling mechanism. Given that, we have just published a new version of 
draft-pp-dprive-common-features that lists "SVCB on the client side" as one 
discovery mechanism, and a new version of 
draft-ietf-dprive-unauth-to-authoritative that points to that mechanism. When 
the folks with the fully-authenticated use case do agree on a signaling 
mechanism, that can be added to the -common-features draft.

We would like the WG chairs to have a formal call for 
draft-pp-dprive-common-features to be a WG document soon so we know how to deal 
with it before the draft cutoff before the next IETF meeting. If the WG wants 
it as a WG document, great; if not, we would pull back all those features into 
draft-ietf-dprive-unauth-to-authoritative and the WG would have to decide what 
to do for the eventual fully-authenticated draft.

--Peter and Paul

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

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

Reply via email to