On 9/9/2021 10:13 AM, Vladimír Čunát wrote:
On 09/09/2021 13.14, Sara Dickinson wrote:
However, if the working group does want the guidance moved there then
we probably need to look again at authors for that document so it can
progress. And if it were to be a normative reference for DoQ the two
would need to move forward together to avoid any delay to DoQ (which
we are hoping will move to WGLC in the not too distant future).
I personally can imagine just writing that 0-rtt guidance would come
in a future RFC (and the reference would be the other way).
I think Sara expressed the practical issue well: in theory, it would be
very nice to have all 0-RTT guidance in a single space, but in practice
we did not see much progress in the development of such guidance.
Support for 0-RTT is a pretty important feature for DNS over QUIC, so
the practical solution for us was to write the guidance as part of the
DNS over QUIC draft. This does not preclude writing a generic 0-RTT
guidance later; that "guidance RFC" will simply have to "update section
5 of [DoQ]." (There are slight differences in the engineering of 0-RTT
in TLS and 0-RTT in QUIC, but I suppose these could be delineated in the
guidance RFC.)
-- Christian Huitema
_______________________________________________
dns-privacy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
