Subject: [Doh] Consensus confirmation

From: Ben Schwartz <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2018 12:32:10 -0400

Hi DOH,

At the meeting in London last week, we asked the room for opinions on two
topics:

1. Should we have a content-type that is Mandatory to Implement?

Several participants spoke in favor of making the default format (currently
called "application/dns-udpwireformat") mandatory, at least for servers.

2. Among the GET and POST modes of operation, which, if any, should be
mandatory to implement?

Among the participants, there was consensus in favor of making both GET and
POST mandatory to implement for servers.

If you would like to voice a dissenting opinion on either point, please
reply on this list.  Otherwise, the chairs will regard these decisions as
the group's consensus.

--Ben

---

From: Thomas Peterson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2018 20:42:32 +0000

I vote that servers MUST implement GET, but MAY implement POST. Not all
implementations will find implmenting multiple methods straightfoward.

Regards

> _______________________________________________
> Doh mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/doh

---

From: Ólafur Guðmundsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2018 21:46:52 +0100

On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 5:32 PM, Ben Schwartz <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Several participants spoke in favor of making the default format
> (currently called "application/dns-udpwireformat") mandatory, at least
> for servers.
>

My understanding was that the name was to be "application/dns-wireformat"
and I support it to be mandatory.

> Among the participants, there was consensus in favor of making both GET
> and POST mandatory to implement for servers.
>

Both is fine, but have slight preference for "POST is MUST and GET is
SHOULD "

Olafur

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 05:25:25 +0000

> Several participants spoke in favor of making the default format (currently called "application/dns-udpwireformat") mandatory, at least for servers.

application/dns-udpwireformat needs to be mandatory to implement for us to have maximum interoperability out of the box.

> 2. Among the GET and POST modes of operation, which, if any, should be mandatory to implement?
> 
> Among the participants, there was consensus in favor of making both GET and POST mandatory to implement for servers.

Both GET and POST need to be mandatory to implement for servers so that we have maximum interoperability out of the box.

--Paul HOffman

---

From: Alexander Mayrhofer <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 07:53:13 +0100

FYI, sent that to Ben only..

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Alexander Mayrhofer <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 7:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Doh] Consensus confirmation
To: Ben Schwartz <[email-masked]>

> 1. Should we have a content-type that is Mandatory to Implement?

Yes, the currently existing "application/dns-udpwireformat" should be
the MTI format for both clients and servers. Other formats MAY be
supported.

> 2. Among the GET and POST modes of operation, which, if any, should be

Both GET and POST should be MTI for servers.

For reason of interopability, clients hence MUST implement at least
one of either GET or POST, even if potential future methods are
defined.

best,
Alex

---

From: Shane Kerr <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 06:54:00 +0000

All,

> Both GET and POST need to be mandatory to implement for servers so that we have maximum interoperability out of the box.

I agree on both counts. Otherwise we are dooming every client ever
written from now until the end of time to either:

* Have a little dance trying to figure out server capabilities, or
* Rely on the lowest-common denominator.

Cheers,

--
Shane

---

From: Jim Reid <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 08:45:18 +0100

> On 26 Mar 2018, at 07:54, Shane Kerr <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 

<AOL Mode>Me too!</AOL mode>

---

From: manu tman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 07:56:07 +0000

On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 6:32 PM Ben Schwartz <[email-masked]> wrote:

> (currently called "application/dns-udpwireformat") mandatory, at least for
> servers.
>

Server must implement application/dns-(udp)?wireformat and client will be
able to choose whatever they want but can rely on wire format

> and POST mandatory to implement for servers.

Yes, server must implement both and client is free to choose.

Manu

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 10:45:20 +0200

On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 12:32:10PM -0400,
 Ben Schwartz <[email-masked]> wrote 
 a message of 158 lines which said:

> Among the participants, there was consensus in favor of making both
> GET and POST mandatory to implement for servers.

I agree with that but I note that Daniel Kahn Gillmor claimed that
clients should (SHOULD?) implement both because a DoH server queried
with POST may redirect you and GET be used. (301 and 302 allows that,
unlike 307 and 308, RFC 7231, section 6.4.)

---

From: Tony Finch <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 14:07:30 +0100

Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]> wrote:

> application/dns-udpwireformat needs to be mandatory to implement for us
> to have maximum interoperability out of the box.
>
> Both GET and POST need to be mandatory to implement for servers so that
> we have maximum interoperability out of the box.

+1

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <[email-masked]>  http://dotat.at/  -  I xn--zr8h punycode
Faeroes, Southeast Iceland: Easterly or southeasterly 6 to gale 8. Moderate or
rough, occasionally very rough. Occasional drizzle. Good, occasionally poor.