Martin Thomson wrote:
On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 11:27 PM, Paul Hoffman<[email protected]> wrote:
Martin: Are you saying that you want DOH to remove the optional parameter from
the application/dns-udpwireformat registration? If so, what do you propose for
the DNSOP WG?
Right now, abandon draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-wireformat-http. But I'll
concede that I'm probably missing something.
the use case is not well-expressed. as a co-author, i apologize.
By my current understanding, draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-wireformat-http is
indistinguishable from a specific implementation of
draft-ietf-doh-dns-over-https. That is, if a DOH server wanted to
service all its queries by forwarding requests to a resolver [1], I
can't see how that would be disallowed by DOH, and that's exactly what
draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-wireformat-http appears to describe.
it's a high-fidelity virtual middlebox, to work around low-fidelity
actual middleboxes. it is not a new dns transport protocol, which would
require client and server changes. dns-over-https is a thin drop-in.
--
P Vixie
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
