Hi Sabrina/Christian, The PR changes look good to me too, but I was thinking it would be very useful for future readers to also indicate that a review has happened. I have made a suggestion here: https://github.com/huitema/dnsoquic/pull/140/files#r792845998
Please let me know if this seems reasonable. Regards Sara. > On 25 Jan 2022, at 22:58, Sabrina Tanamal via RT <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Christian, > > These changes look good. Thank you! > > Best regards, > > Sabrina Tanamal > Lead IANA Services Specialist > > On Tue Jan 25 20:55:17 2022, [email protected] wrote: >> Hello Sabrina, >> >> Yes, reading the section 10.2 again, I see that there is some leftover >> text from previous iterations, and it creates confusion. I just >> proposed >> a set of changes on our github repo -- >> https://github.com/huitema/dnsoquic/pull/140. The changes affet >> section >> 10.2 as follow: >> >> 1) Remove the line "IANA responded to the early allocation request >> with >> the following TEMPORARY assignment:", since IANA did not do anything >> like that. >> >> 2) Remove the line "The TEMPORARY assignment expires 13th December >> 2022." There is no such temporary assignment. >> >> 3) Delete section 10.2.1, which was already slated for removal. This >> removes the confusing references to port number 784. >> >> Would that address your concerns? >> >> -- Christian Huitema >> >> >> On 1/25/2022 9:36 AM, Sabrina Tanamal via RT wrote: >>> Hi Christian, >>> >>> See [ST] below. >>> >>> On Tue Jan 25 02:04:28 2022,[email protected] wrote: >>>> On 1/24/2022 8:39 AM, Sabrina Tanamal via RT wrote: >>>>> (BEGIN IANA COMMENTS) >>>>> >>>>> IESG/Authors/WG Chairs: >>>>> >>>>> The IANA Functions Operator has completed its review of draft-ietf- >>>>> dprive-dnsoquic-08. If any part of this review is inaccurate, >>>>> please >>>>> let us know. >>>>> >>>>> The IANA Functions Operator has a question about one of the actions >>>>> requested in the IANA Considerations section of this document. >>>>> >>>>> The IANA Functions Operator understands that, upon approval of this >>>>> document, there are four actions which we must complete. >>>>> >>>>> First, in the TLS Application-Layer Protocol Negotiation (ALPN) >>>>> Protocol IDs registry on the Transport Layer Security (TLS) >>>>> Extensions registry page located at: >>>>> >>>>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-extensiontype-values/ >>>> The registry is located at: >>>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-extensiontype-values/tls- >>>> extensiontype-values.xhtml#alpn-protocol-ids. >>>> >>>> That registry is under the title "TLS Application-Layer Protocol >>>> Negotiation (ALPN) Protocol IDs" >>>> >>>>> a new registration is to be made as follows: >>>>> >>>>> Protocol: DoQ >>>>> Identification Sequence: 0x64 0x6F 0x71 ("doq") >>>>> Reference: [ RFC-to-be ] >>>>> >>>>> As this document requests registrations in an Expert Review (see >>>>> RFC >>>>> 8126) registry, we will initiate the required Expert Review via a >>>>> separate request. This review must be completed before the >>>>> document's >>>>> IANA state can be changed to "IANA OK." >>>>> >>>>> Second, we will update the description and list this document as an >>>>> additional reference for UDP port 853: >>>>> >>>>> Service Name: domain-s >>>>> Port Number: 853 >>>>> Transport Protocol(s): UDP >>>>> Assignee: IETF DPRIVE Chairs >>>>> Contact: Brian Haberman >>>>> Description: DNS query-response protocol run over DTLS or QUIC >>>>> Reference: [RFC7858][RFC8094] This document >>>>> >>>>> In addition, the Description field for the corresponding TCP port >>>>> 853 >>>>> allocation will be changed to 'DNS query-response protocol run over >>>>> TLS'. >>>>> >>>>> IANA Question: We understand from Section 8.1.1 of RFC 6335 that >>>>> the >>>>> IESG should be listed as the assignee and the IETF Chair as the >>>>> contact for an IETF-stream document. Can you confirm that this is >>>>> correct? >>>> Yes. >>>>> IANA Question: Since we didn't make a temporary early allocation >>>>> request for the above port, can the early allocation language be >>>>> removed from the document? We will make the changes as agreed with >>>>> the port experts when the document is approved for publication. >>>> Please explain what you mean by "the early allocation language." >>> [ST] Section 10.2 says, “IANA responded to the early allocation >>> request with the following TEMPORARY assignment:” and states that the >>> allocation expires on 13 December 2022. However, on 13 December 2021, >>> the determination by the port experts was that the existing port >>> would be modified when the document was approved for publication, not >>> that an early allocation or modification would be made. Can this >>> section be rewritten to reflect that a modification is being >>> requested by the document? >>> >>>>> IANA notes that section 10.2.1 contains notes for implementer of >>>>> early experiments and no instructions for IANA. >>>> Section 10.2.1. should be removed once the allocation is done. The >>>> text >>>> says "(RFC EDITOR NOTE: THIS SECTION TO BE REMOVED BEFORE >>>> PUBLICATION)". >>>> It might have been better to describe an IANA action rather than at >>>> RFC >>>> EDITOR action, but the intent is clear. >>> [ST] If a port allocation is required here, please clarify what the >>> IANA actions should be. >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> Sabrina Tanamal >>> Lead IANA Services Specialist >>> >>>>> Third, in the Extended DNS Error Codes registry on the Domain Name >>>>> System (DNS) Parameters registry page located at: >>>>> >>>>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters/ >>>>> >>>>> a new registration will be made as follows: >>>>> >>>>> INFO-CODE: [ TBD-at-Registration ] >>>>> Purpose: Too Early >>>>> Reference: [ RFC-to-be ] >>>> Yes. >>>>> Fourth, a new registry is to be created called the DNS over QUIC >>>>> Error Codes registry. The new registry will be located on the >>>>> Domain >>>>> Name System (DNS) Parameters registry page located at: >>>>> >>>>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters/ >>>>> >>>>> The registration rules for the new registry are: >>>>> >>>>> 0x00 - 0x3f require Standards Action or IESG Approval >>>>> >>>>> Permanent registrations for values larger than 0x3f, which are >>>>> assigned using the Specification Required policy (as defined in >>>>> [RFC8126]) >>>>> >>>>> Provisional registrations for values larger than 0x3f, which >>>>> require >>>>> Expert Review, as defined in Section 4.5 of [RFC8126]. >>>>> >>>>> There are initial registrations in the new registry as follows: >>>>> >>>>> +==========+=======================+================+============================+ >>>>> |Value | Error |Description | Specification | >>>>> +==========+=======================+================+============================+ >>>>> |0x0 | DOQ_NO_ERROR |No error | [ RFC-to-be; Section 5.3 ] | >>>>> +----------+-----------------------+---------------- >>>>> +----------------------------+ >>>>> |0x1 | DOQ_INTERNAL_ERROR |Implementation | [ RFC-to-be; Section >>>>> 5.3 >>>>> ] | >>>>> | | |error | | >>>>> +----------+-----------------------+---------------- >>>>> +----------------------------+ >>>>> |0x2 | DOQ_PROTOCOL_ERROR |Generic protocol| [ RFC-to-be; Section >>>>> 5.3 >>>>> ] | >>>>> | | |violation | | >>>>> +----------+-----------------------+---------------- >>>>> +----------------------------+ >>>>> |0x3 | DOQ_REQUEST_CANCELLED |Request | [ RFC-to-be; Section 5.3 ] >>>>> | >>>>> | | |cancelled by | | >>>>> | | |client | | >>>>> +----------+-----------------------+---------------- >>>>> +----------------------------+ >>>>> |0x4 | DOQ_EXCESSIVE_LOAD |Closing a | [ RFC-to-be; Section 5.3 ] | >>>>> | | |connection for | | >>>>> | | |excessive load | | >>>>> +----------+-----------------------+---------------- >>>>> +----------------------------+ >>>>> |0xd098ea5e| DOQ_ERROR_RESERVED |Alternative | [ RFC-to-be; Section >>>>> 5.3 ] | >>>>> | | |error code used | | >>>>> | | |for tests | | >>>>> +----------+-----------------------+---------------- >>>>> +----------------------------+ >>>>> >>>>> The IANA Functions Operator understands that these are the only >>>>> actions required to be completed upon approval of this document. >>>> Yes. >>>>> Note: The actions requested in this document will not be completed >>>>> until the document has been approved for publication as an RFC. >>>>> This >>>>> message is meant only to confirm the list of actions that will be >>>>> performed. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you, >>>>> >>>>> Sabrina Tanamal >>>>> Lead IANA Services Specialist >>>>> >>>>> (END IANA COMMENTS) >>>> Thank you! >>>> >>>> -- Christian Huitema >>> _______________________________________________ >>> dns-privacy mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy > _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
