Re: [dns-privacy] [internet-dra...@ietf.org: I-D Action: draft-bortzmeyer-dprive-step-2-00.txt]

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 12:07:29PM -0400, Robert Edmonds wrote a message of 18 lines which said: > Why port 953? I thought the registration for the “domain-s” port was > 853? It was a bug. It is fixed in the Github repository and the fix will be published in -01.

Re: [dns-privacy] [internet-dra...@ietf.org: I-D Action: draft-bortzmeyer-dprive-step-2-00.txt]

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 11:28:12AM -0400, Bob Harold wrote a message of 63 lines which said: > why talk to port 953 That was a typo, it will be fixed in -01 > I was assuming normal unencrypted DNSSEC to get the key, For privacy, encrypted-but-unauthenticated is

Re: [dns-privacy] [internet-dra...@ietf.org: I-D Action: draft-bortzmeyer-dprive-step-2-00.txt]

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 11:11:18AM -0400, Bob Harold wrote a message of 130 lines which said: > I would think that "Key in DNS, authenticated by DNSSEC" would be > the obvious choice. It is mentioned, section 2.2. For the -00 version, I did not try to order ("obvious" or