All As Brian and I have stated a few times, and Eric our AD has supported, the plan with this draft is once the authors are ready is to take it to WGLC, and then park it while we wait for implementations, and some signs of interoperability testing. Once we and the working group feel there has been reasonable progress, we will un-park the document.
At the time we un-park it to move it to the IESG we can have the discussion about Standards Track, Experimental, or Informational. To have that discussion now serves no real purpose (in my mind). The chairs will however hold the document status as something for the WG to decide on. thanks tim On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 3:17 PM Hollenbeck, Scott <shollenbeck= [email protected]> wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Hoffman <[email protected]> > > Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2023 1:48 PM > > To: Hollenbeck, Scott <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected] > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] Intended Status for > draft-ietf- > > dprive-unilateral-probing > > > > Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not > click links > > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content > is > > safe. > > > > On Mar 2, 2023, at 10:11 AM, Hollenbeck, Scott > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Paul Hoffman <[email protected]> > > >> Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 2:51 PM > > >> To: Hollenbeck, Scott <[email protected]> > > >> Cc: [email protected] > > >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ext] [dns-privacy] Intended Status for > > > draft-ietf- > > >> dprive-unilateral-probing > > >> > > >> Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not > > >> click > > > links > > >> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the > > >> content > > > is > > >> safe. > > >> > > >> On Mar 1, 2023, at 10:46 AM, Hollenbeck, Scott > > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> After a recent-re-read of draft-ietf-dprive-unilateral-probing and > > >>> its > > >> normative dependencies, I have a strong belief that the draft > > >> describes > > > more of > > >> an experiment than a Proposed Standard. > > >> > > >> All protocols before they are deployed are experiments. > > >> > > >>> The reason we need "opportunistic" and "unilateral" actions is > > >>> because > > > there > > >> are gaps in specification, implementation, and deployment of services > > >> for recursive-authoritative encryption. > > >> > > >> That is not what the WG decided. It decided that opportunistic was > > > sufficient for > > >> some threat models. Other threat models have the gaps you discuss. > > > > > > [SAH] WG decisions aren't immutable. I posted this as a proposal for > > > reconsideration. > > > > > >>> Experimental status worked for QNAME minimization. > > >> > > >> That's irrelevant. > > >> > > >>> It can work here, too. > > >> > > >> So could Informational; that is also irrelevant. > > > > > > [SAH] It's hardly irrelevant given the successful approach taken with > > > QNAME minimization. It's a valid example of how Experimental status > could > > work. > > > > The experimental status of the original QNAME minimisation document was > > due to there being protocol options that the WG thought could not be > chosen > > between without data from deployments. That is not the case with > draft-ietf- > > dprive-unilateral-probing. In fact, the opposite is the case: because > the probing > > is unilateral, the resolver gets to make its own choices about what is > working > > and what is not. That's the whole point of the decision ladders in the > document. > > [SAH] Perhaps, but this is what the working group's charter says about > this topic: > > "Investigate potential solutions for adding confidentiality to DNS > exchanges involving authoritative servers (Experimental)." > > Experimental. Not Proposed Standard. > > Scott > > _______________________________________________ > 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
