Dear CoRE WG,
Thanks to the authors and the reviewers that provided comments on the
list for this draft. Given the in-room support and the list discussion
during the WGA the chairs believe that there is sufficient support for
the adoption of this document in CoRE.
The authors are advised to
Dear all,
this is just a gentle reminder that the WGA call is scheduled to be
closed by this Thursday 1st of September.
It would be great if the participants of the discussion could summarize
their position towards the call. In particular for those ambivalent or
opposing WGA.
Thanks!
Hi Ted,
sorry for the late reply!
re scenarios: during bootstrappign, a constrained requires CoAP and
DNS client capablities. for example, when an LwM2M client registers at a
LwM2M server, which acts as a partial CoAP Resource Directory.
re: your statement "The privacy benefit of DoH
Before you go down the mDNS-over-constrained-networks rabbit hole, you
might want to look at existing practice. E.g. Thread uses SRP
(draft-ietf-dnssd-srp, in last call) for service registration, and then
uses regular DNS and DNS Push for lookups. mDNS is used on the
infrastructure link (e.g.
Hi!
Martine Lenders, here, one of the co-authors of the draft.
Indeed, as Carsten already stated: Using OSCORE is one of our main use
cases, using a compressed format for DNS messages is another.
We implemented both DNS over DTLS and DNS over CoAP (DoC), including the
variants DNS over
On 15. Aug 2022, at 19:41, Ted Lemon wrote:
>
>> On Aug 15, 2022, at 1:34 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>>
>> On 15. Aug 2022, at 17:11, Ted Lemon wrote:
>>>
>>> This is a good question. I think we’d want to understand what the actual
>>> use case is for DNS-over-CoAP before proceeding with
> On Aug 15, 2022, at 1:34 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>
> On 15. Aug 2022, at 17:11, Ted Lemon wrote:
>>
>> This is a good question. I think we’d want to understand what the actual use
>> case is for DNS-over-CoAP before proceeding with this,
>
> The main use case is systems that already
On 15. Aug 2022, at 17:11, Ted Lemon wrote:
>
> This is a good question. I think we’d want to understand what the actual use
> case is for DNS-over-CoAP before proceeding with this,
The main use case is systems that already implement CoAP and do not want to add
machinery for some protocols
This is a good question. I think we’d want to understand what the actual use
case is for DNS-over-CoAP before proceeding with this, since DNS-over-DTLS
would obviously be less costly to implement. The stated use case of this
document is to encrypt DNS packets, which is already addressed by
DPRIVE is also a fine location.
Has anyone implemented DNS over DTLS for your use case?
tim
On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 6:04 AM Jaime Jiménez wrote:
> CCing the right DNSOP mailing list now.
>
> On 15.8.2022 11.26, Jaime Jiménez wrote:
>
> Dear CoRE WG,
>
> We would like to start the call for
CCing the right DNSOP mailing list now.
On 15.8.2022 11.26, Jaime Jiménez wrote:
Dear CoRE WG,
We would like to start the call for adoption on draft-lenders-dns-over-coap.
The draft defines a protocol for sending DNS messages over secure CoAP (DTLS
and/or OSCORE). The draft was discussed
11 matches
Mail list logo
