On 9/9/21 1:49 PM, Ben Schwartz wrote: > On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 7:14 AM Sara Dickinson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Ben, >> >> Thanks for the comment. When doing the last update there was a discussion >> between the authors about referencing that document, however we chose not >> to a for a few reasons: >> >> * Whilst that work was adopted in April 2020, >> draft-ietf-dprive-early-data-00 expired in October 2020, and I can’t see >> any mailing list mentions of it after July time 2020 >> > > Yes. I think we need to reactivate it, with new authors if necessary. >
People who are interested in the early-data draft should work with the authors to revive the document and raise points of discussion with the WG. > >> * It actually proposes a registry for RR types that can be used in early >> data which generated some discussion - the DoQ draft has a much simpler >> approach. > > > Yes, I think the DoQ draft's approach is better. However, the existence of > a conflict suggests a lack of working group consensus. I think the > clearest way to resolve that conflict (and avoid discrepancies in the > treatment of 0-RTT between DoT and DoQ) is to update > draft-ietf-dprive-early-data. As noted above, I would encourage folks to engage with the early-data draft authors. I do not see a reason to hold up the progression of the DoQ draft at this point. Regards, Brian
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
