Hi All,
I just wanted to say that the final draft gives me great confidence in the
"collective discussion on merit" process of the IETF.
The final padding strategy document includes the "no padding" option, and
relegates it to an appendix, and also includes the "Full Monty" padding (which
I pushed for the inclusion of) and gives it its place as maximally secure, but
NOT RECOMMENDED. This blend of intellectual honesty and practicality must be
the hallmark for which the IETF strives.
I believe that the end result here shows that this has been achieved. Well
done all. Full consideration of options, with analysis, and the final document
clearly shows how the technical community have evaluated those options.
Clarity matters.
I support the publication as EXPERIMENTAL.
Regards,
Hugo Connery
--
Head of IT, DTU Environment, http://www.env.dtu.dk
:(){:|:;};:
From: dns-privacy on behalf of Brian Haberman
Sent: Tuesday, 13 February 2018 13:59
To: terry.mander...@icann.org
Cc: dns-privacy@ietf.org; iesg-secret...@ietf.org; br...@innovationslab.net;
dprive-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [dns-privacy] Publication has been requested for
draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-04
Brian Haberman has requested publication of draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-04
as Experimental on behalf of the DPRIVE working group.
Please verify the document's state at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy/
___
dns-privacy mailing list
dns-privacy@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
___
dns-privacy mailing list
dns-privacy@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
