Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for "DNS Terminology" (draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8499bis)

Hi, LGTM. I’ve opened a small PR to just update the DoQ references now there is an RFC: https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8499bis/pull/12 Regards Sara. > On 17 Feb 2023, at 15:51, Benno Overeinder wrote: > > Dear DNSOP WG, > > Following the latest consultation with the

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-session-signal-04.txt

IETF. > >Title : DNS Stateful Operations >Authors : Ray Bellis > Stuart Cheshire > John Dickinson > Sara Dickinson > Allison Mankin >

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-04.txt

a work item of the Domain Name System Operations WG of the IETF. > >Title : C-DNS: A DNS Packet Capture Format >Authors : John Dickinson > Jim Hague > Sara Dickinson >

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-05.txt

rs : John Dickinson > Jim Hague > Sara Dickinson > Terry Manderson > John Bond > Filename: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-05.txt > Pages : 62 > Date

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-06.txt

: C-DNS: A DNS Packet Capture Format >Authors : John Dickinson > Jim Hague > Sara Dickinson > Terry Manderson > John Bond > Filename: draft-ietf-dns

Re: [DNSOP] Blog Post: DNS over TLS support in Android P Developer Preview

> On 13 Apr 2018, at 20:49, Warren Kumari wrote: > > Hi all, > > As Erik Kline and Ben Schwartz seem to be too modest to toot their own > horn, I'll do it for them: > https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2018/04/dns-over-tls-support-in-android-p.html > >

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-07.txt

Format >Authors : John Dickinson > Jim Hague > Sara Dickinson > Terry Manderson > John Bond > Filename: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-07.txt

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis

Hi all, Two questions came up recently when writing the DNS Privacy BCP with respect to terminology (and on the dns-operations list): 1) What do folks think about adding a new definition to this document for a shortened term for DNS-over-TLS? Since we now have DoH I’ve often taken to referri

Re: [DNSOP] QNAME minimisation on the standards track?

> On 17 Jul 2018, at 17:35, Paul Wouters wrote: > > On Tue, 17 Jul 2018, tjw ietf wrote: > >> Subject: Re: [DNSOP] QNAME minimisation on the standards track? >> I’d like to see a more fleshed out operational considerations section. > > That would be good indeed. Especially with respect to bro

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-huque-dnsop-multi-provider-dnssec

I also support adoption of this draft - it is attempting to address a genuine impediment to deploying DNSSEC and I think this group is the right place to work on it. As mentioned at the mic in Montreal, I’d like to see it additionally reflect how the proposals here feed into the process for mov

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-bortzmeyer-rfc7816bis

+1 for adoption and willing to review Sara. > On 25 Jul 2018, at 04:31, Davey Song(宋林健) wrote: > > +1 > > DNS privacy is an important issue. I support this adoption. And I’m willing > to review it. >   <> > Davey > 发件人: DNSOP [mailto:dnsop-boun...@ietf.org ]

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08.txt

gt; directories. > This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations WG of the IETF. > >Title : C-DNS: A DNS Packet Capture Format >Authors : John Dickinson > Jim Hague > Sara Dickinson

Re: [DNSOP] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

> Begin forwarded message: > > From: Benjamin Kaduk mailto:ka...@mit.edu>> > Subject: Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: > (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) > Date: 19 November 2018 at 00:28:19 GMT > To: "The IESG" mailto:i...@ietf.org>> > Cc: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capt

Re: [DNSOP] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

> On 19 Nov 2018, at 20:37, Alexey Melnikov wrote: Hi Alexey, Thanks for the review. > > Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: Discuss > -- > DISCUSS: >

Re: [DNSOP] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

> On 21 Nov 2018, at 14:42, Alexey Melnikov wrote: Thanks for the quick response. > > Hi Sara, >>> >>> 1) >>> >>> In 7.4.2: >>> >>> | filter | O | T | "tcpdump" [pcap] style filter for | >>> | | | | input. | >>> >>> T

Re: [DNSOP] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with COMMENT)

> On 21 Nov 2018, at 10:58, Alissa Cooper wrote: > > > >> On Nov 20, 2018, at 9:01 PM, Joe Abley wrote: >> >> Hi Alissa! >> >> On Nov 20, 2018, at 20:18, Alissa Cooper wrote: >> >>> I support Benjamin's first DISCUSS point. In addition to documenting the >>> privacy considerations, I thi

Re: [DNSOP] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with COMMENT)

> On 21 Nov 2018, at 02:09, Adam Roach wrote: > > Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: No Objection Hi Adam. Many thanks for the review. > -- > COMMENT: > --

Re: [DNSOP] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with COMMENT)

> Begin forwarded message: > > From: Eric Rescorla > Subject: Eric Rescorla's No Objection on > draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with COMMENT) > Date: 21 November 2018 at 02:07:20 GMT > To: "The IESG" > Cc: Tim Wicinski , tjw.i...@gmail.com, dnsop@ietf.org, > dnsop-cha...@ietf.org, d

Re: [DNSOP] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

> On 21 Nov 2018, at 17:33, Warren Kumari wrote: > > [ - DNSOP (for clutter), +Heather / RFC Editor for sanity :-P ] > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 9:47 AM Sara Dickinson <mailto:s...@sinodun.com>> wrote: > > >> On 21 Nov 2018, at 14:42, Alexey Melni

Re: [DNSOP] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with COMMENT)

> On 21 Nov 2018, at 03:24, Ben Campbell wrote: > > Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Fe

Re: [DNSOP] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

> Begin forwarded message: > > From: Benjamin Kaduk mailto:ka...@mit.edu>> > Subject: Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: > (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) > Date: 19 November 2018 at 00:28:19 GMT > To: "The IESG" mailto:i...@ietf.org>> > Cc: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-captu

Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

> From: Paul Hoffman > Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on > draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) > Date: 27 November 2018 at 14:59:51 GMT > To: Alexey Melnikov > Cc: dnsop , The IESG > > On Nov 27, 2018, at 3:05 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote: >>

Re: [DNSOP] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

> On 24 Nov 2018, at 03:35, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 01:53:09PM +0000, Sara Dickinson wrote: >> >> >>> Begin forwarded message: >>> >>> From: Benjamin Kaduk mailto:ka...@mit.edu>> >>> Subject: Benjamin

Re: [DNSOP] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

> On 24 Nov 2018, at 03:58, Benjamin Kaduk <mailto:ka...@mit.edu>> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 12:01:00PM +0000, Sara Dickinson wrote: >>> >>> Section 7.4.1.1.1 >>> >>> Am I parsing the "query-response-hints"

[DNSOP] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-09.txt

apture Format >Authors : John Dickinson > Jim Hague > Sara Dickinson > Terry Manderson > John Bond > Filename: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-09.txt

Re: [DNSOP] [IANA #1129407] Last Call: (C-DNS: A DNS Packet Capture Format) to Proposed Standard

: C-DNS: A DNS Packet Capture Format >Authors : John Dickinson > Jim Hague > Sara Dickinson > Terry Manderson > John Bond > Filename:

Re: [DNSOP] comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-03

> On 16 Jul 2015, at 03:15, Paul Hoffman > wrote: > > On 15 Jul 2015, at 17:33, Andrew Sullivan wrote: >> >> Just on this issue, and speaking only for myself (but as one of the >> people behind this document), my view is that this WG has historically >> been one of

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-02.txt

> On 20 Jul 2015, at 12:19, Petr Spacek wrote: > > The -02 version of the draft makes a lot of sense to me, here are only two > nits: Many thanks for the review. > On 20 Jul 2015, at 12:19, Petr Spacek wrote: > > Section 5 says: > > "... TCP should be considered a valid alternative transp

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-02.txt

> On 3 Aug 2015, at 22:14, Wessels, Duane wrote: > > > I offered to review this document during the WG meeting in Prague… Hi Duane, Many thanks for the detailed review. They are all useful comments that will be added to the document. > >> >> 3.1. Option Format >> >> The edns-tcp-keep

[DNSOP] Review of draft-wing-dprive-dnsodtls-01

Hi, Here are some comments on the draft-wing-dprive-dnsodtls-01 draft (some of which echo comments at the mic from the recent working group meeting). General comments: --- 1) My major comment is that I don’t think the current draft tackles the problem of truncation of

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-03.txt

on Requirements >Authors : John Dickinson > Sara Dickinson > Ray Bellis > Allison Mankin > Duane Wessels > Filename: draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-03.txt

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis

> On 12 Oct 2015, at 13:36, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 01:09:38PM +0100, > sara wrote > a message of 107 lines which said: > >> So under normal circumstances matching on just the Message ID should >> be sufficient for TCP, which was the reason the QCLASS+QNAME+QTYP

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive

> On 7 Oct 2015, at 18:17, 神明達哉 wrote: > > > I've read the 03 version of draft. It's very well written and I've > not found any critical technical issues. So I basically think it's > ready to ship. > Hi, Many thanks for the review. > I have a couple of minor comments, which the authors mi

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis

> On 9 Oct 2015, at 20:53, Joe Abley wrote: Joe, Thanks for the review. > I made a few notes as I read through, but it would be entirely fine with me > if they were all ignored. All your suggested rewordings improve the document and have been committed - thanks. > > Section 8: is there

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis

> On 12 Oct 2015, at 11:57, Tony Finch wrote: > > Tim Wicinski wrote: >> >> This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis > > I have re-read the draft and it looks good to me. Thanks. > > A couple of suggestions for section 7: > > For the avoidance of future doubt,

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis

> On 12 Oct 2015, at 21:35, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > For de-multiplexing the responses off the socket the *only* field > you should be using is the ID field. There are error conditions > that result in only the DNS header being returned. All responses > are *supposed* to be constucted in the

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis

> On 14 Oct 2015, at 16:02, Ray Bellis wrote: > > > > On 14/10/2015 15:55, Tony Finch wrote: > >> Yes. Perhaps "transport tuple" is an excessively clever way of saying >> "same connection". When I wrote that I wanted to allow independent choice >> of query ID per connection (rather than imply

[DNSOP] Fwd: Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis

> Begin forwarded message: > > From: 神明達哉 > Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis > Date: 15 October 2015 01:52:09 BST > To: Sara Dickinson > Cc: Joe Abley , dnsop > > At Wed, 14 Oct 2015 13:20:39 +0100, > Sara Dickins

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive

> On 15 Oct 2015, at 02:29, 神明達哉 mailto:jin...@wide.ad.jp>> > wrote: > > At Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:55:02 +0100, > > I have no objection to this text per se, but the described reason why > the client might want to do this is different from what I intended. I > was more concerned about the case whe

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive

> On 15 Oct 2015, at 18:00, 神明達哉 wrote: > > I see your point. But whether the updated notification from the > server works relies on whether the client includes an OPT RR in > subsequent queries, ambiguity on the latter can easily lead to > interoperability problem. So I thought this should be

Re: [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-04.txt

p-5966bis-04.txt > has been successfully submitted by Sara Dickinson and posted to the > IETF repository. > > Name: draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis > Revision: 04 > Title:DNS Transport over TCP - Implementation Requirements > Document date:2015-11

Re: [DNSOP] Gen-ART telechat review of draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-04

> On 4 Jan 2016, at 18:32, Brian E Carpenter > wrote: > > On 04/01/2016 22:38, sara wrote: >> >>> On 31 Dec 2015, at 22:11, Brian E Carpenter >>> wrote: >>> >>> Still "Ready with issues" pending a new version. >> >> Hi Brian, >> >> There are a couple of minor issues still to resolve from

Re: [DNSOP] Brian Haberman's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-04: (with DISCUSS)

> On 4 Jan 2016, at 18:18, Brian Haberman wrote: > > -- > DISCUSS: > -- > > I support the publication of this document, but I have a point I want to > discuss

Re: [DNSOP] OPS-DIR review of draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-04

> On 23 Dec 2015, at 13:30, Sara Dickinson wrote: >> >> [JM] Sorry, this is my fault on the confusion on the previous two >> comments - I was actually still confused by section 3.2.1 (not 3.3.2) >> paragraph 3, why a DNS client would first signal they support the E

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-05.txt

: The edns-tcp-keepalive EDNS0 Option >Authors : Paul Wouters > Joe Abley > Sara Dickinson > Ray Bellis > Filename: draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-05.txt > Pages

Re: [DNSOP] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-04: (with COMMENT)

> On 6 Jan 2016, at 07:57, Barry Leiba wrote: > > Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-04: No Objection > > -- > COMMENT: >

Re: [DNSOP] Martin Stiemerling's Yes on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-05: (with COMMENT)

> On 5 Jan 2016, at 22:11, Martin Stiemerling wrote: > > -- > COMMENT: > -- > > One comment and request for clarification: > > In the first paragraph of Secti

Re: [DNSOP] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-05: (with COMMENT)

> On 6 Jan 2016, at 08:21, Barry Leiba wrote: > > -- Section 5 -- > > This requirement is hereby relaxed. Stub resolvers and recursive > resolvers MAY elect to send either TCP or UDP queries depending on > local operational reasons. TCP MAY be used before sending any UDP > queries. I

Re: [DNSOP] Martin Stiemerling's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-04: (with COMMENT)

> On 5 Jan 2016, at 22:29, Martin Stiemerling wrote: > > > Two comments for your considerations: > > 1) Section 3.3.2 is talking about this "It is reasonable for this value > to change [...] or in consideration of intermediary behaviour (for > example TCP middleboxes or NATs)." > Can you plea

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-06.txt

plementation Requirements > Authors : John Dickinson > Sara Dickinson > Ray Bellis > Allison Mankin > Duane Wessels > Filename: draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-0

Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-05

> On 26 Jan 2016, at 07:53, joel jaeggli wrote: > >> >> For DNS-over-DTLS-over-UDP, we should not need to negotiate the >> client or server capability to send multiple DNS queries over the >> same DTLS connection; the mere act of negotiating DTLS indicates the >> ability to handle subsequent DN

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-06.txt

Joe Abley > Sara Dickinson > Ray Bellis > Filename: draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-06.txt > Pages : 14 > Date: 2016-02-22 > > Abstract: > DNS mes

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-06.txt

> On 22 Feb 2016, at 18:41, Bob Harold wrote: > > I am not understanding one thing. > > 3.3.2. Sending Responses > > Says that a server "that receives a query ... without the edns-tcp-keepalive > option ... MAY include the edns-tcp-keepalive option in the response" > > But > > 3.4. TCP S

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-06.txt

> On 22 Feb 2016, at 23:24, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > Strictly speaking the additional section can have anything the > server feels is relevent including a OPT record (this in RFC 1034). > Clients are expected to cope with anything added to the additional > section. > > 6. Using local data o

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-song-dns-wireformat-http-02.txt

Hi, During Shane’s presentation on this draft at the working group in Buenos Aires today it was mentioned I made a few notes on the Google-over-HTTPs service as part of the IETF Hackathon. The are very high level but can be found here: https://portal.sinodun.com/wiki/display/TDNS/Google%27s+Pub

Re: [DNSOP] Possible issues with DNS over HTTP wire format draft

> On 8 Aug 2016, at 14:41, Shane Kerr wrote: > > Hello, > > As for a requirement for TLS... the document currently says that > implementers SHOULD use TLS. My own feeling is that this should be > enough; apparently the recommendation to require TLS was made in the > HTTP/2 working group and rej

[DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dickinson-dnsop-dns-capture-format-00.txt

d message: > > From: internet-dra...@ietf.org > Subject: New Version Notification for > draft-dickinson-dnsop-dns-capture-format-00.txt > Date: 31 October 2016 at 18:09:23 GMT > To: "John Dickinson" , "John Bond" , > "Sara Dickinson" , "Jim H

Re: [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-dickinson-dnsop-dns-capture-format-00.txt

> On 1 Nov 2016, at 08:12, Jerry Lundström wrote: > > Hi Sara, > > On 10/31/16 18:22, Sara Dickinson wrote: >> https://github.com/dns-stats/draft-dns-capture-format >> <https://github.com/dns-stats/draft-dns-capture-format> Hi Jerry, Thanks for the

Re: [DNSOP] CBOR-DNS compression is 30% the size of gzip compressed PCAP

> On 15 Nov 2016, at 14:59, George Michaelson wrote: > > Terry clarified, the 30% size compression is not from uncompressed, > but is the comparision with compressed gzip pcap. > > So, compressed DNS-CBOR is *significantly* smaller than pcap.gz Yup - sorry if I wasn’t clear in the presentation

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-00.txt

gt; directories. > This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations of the IETF. > >Title : C-DNS: A DNS Packet Capture Format >Authors : John Dickinson > Jim Hague > Sara Dickinson

Re: [DNSOP] Soliciting feedback for draft-kristoff-dnsop-dns-tcp-requirements

> On 21 Oct 2016, at 16:46, Paul Hoffman wrote: > > On 16 Oct 2016, at 8:22, John Kristoff wrote: > >> If I could trouble you to consider reviewing this and provide any >> comments you might have about it, that would be appreciated. Thank you. >> >> DNS Transport over TCP - Operational Requi

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-01.txt

ctories. > This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations of the IETF. > >Title : C-DNS: A DNS Packet Capture Format >Authors : John Dickinson > Jim Hague > Sara Dickinson >

Re: [DNSOP] The DNSOP WG has placed draft-kristoff-dnsop-dns-tcp-requirements in state "Candidate for WG Adoption"

> On 6 Apr 2017, at 19:42, Bob Harold wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 4:34 PM, IETF Secretariat > mailto:ietf-secretariat-re...@ietf.org>> > wrote: > > The DNSOP WG has placed draft-kristoff-dnsop-dns-tcp-requirements in > state > Candidate for WG Adoption (entered by Tim Wicinski) > >

Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Call for Adoption: draft-kristoff-dnsop-dns-tcp-requirements

> On 11 May 2017, at 11:57, tjw ietf wrote: > This starts a Call for Adoption for: draft-kristoff-dnsop-dns-tcp-requirements > > The draft is available here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kristoff-dnsop-dns-tcp-requirements/ >

Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Call for Adoption: draft-kristoff-dnsop-dns-tcp-requirements

> On 25 May 2017, at 18:00, John Kristoff wrote: > > >> Section 2: I think it might be useful to include a section in section >> 2 describing the fact that the lack of, or very limited >> implementation of TCP also fed the perception that it was a security >> risk. > > The references > > Che