Subject: [Doh] Alissa Cooper's Yes on draft-ietf-doh-dns-over-https-13: (with COMMENT)

From: Alissa Cooper <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 08:23:25 -0700

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-doh-dns-over-https-13: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-doh-dns-over-https/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for your work on this protocol and for the comprehensive
privacy considerations.

COMMENTS
S 5.1.
>      The DoH client SHOULD include an HTTP "Accept" request header field
>      to indicate what type of content can be understood in response.
>      Irrespective of the value of the Accept request header field, the
>      client MUST be prepared to process "application/dns-message" (as
>      described in Section 7) responses but MAY also process any other type
>      it receives.

I read this before seeing the other email discussion about it and
thought it meant that the client might be processing other types for
non-DNS HTTP requests, which obviously was the wrong interpretation. I
think this text requires some clarification.

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 16:14:20 +0000

> Thanks for your work on this protocol and for the comprehensive

The WG contributed most of that.

> think this text requires some clarification.

We'll fix this to be clear that the other media types are DNS-related.

--Paul Hoffman