Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-dprive-problem-statement-05.txt

From: Suresh Krishnan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 02:50:41 +0000

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on 
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before 
posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-dprive-problem-statement-05.txt
Reviewer: Suresh Krishnan
Review Date: 2015/06/09
IESG Telechat date: 2015/06/11

Summary: Thank you for this very interesting and well written document. 
This draft is ready for publication as an Informational RFC but I do 
have a few minor comments you may wish to consider.

Minor:

* General

Not really sure if it belongs in this document, but I personally think 
that DNScrypt is probably worth at least a passing mention as it 
specifically deals with encryption of DNS requests.

https://www.opendns.com/about/innovations/dnscrypt/

* Section 2.1

In this text below it is unclear what value the parenthesized text adds. 
Suggest removing this text or provide examples of the "more dubious reasons"

" The zone transfer QTYPE [RFC5936] is often blocked or restricted to 
authenticated/authorized access to enforce this difference (and maybe 
for other, more dubious reasons)."

* Section 8.3

Why is there a separate class of references for URI? Shouldn't this be 
folded into either Normative or Informative? To be more specific, what 
exactly is the difference between the Google Public DNS Privacy 
reference in the URI subsection and the other Wikipedia references in 8.2.

Editorial:

* Section 1
s/assume/assumes/

Thanks
Suresh

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 13:51:47 +0300

Thanks again for your review, Suresh!

For what it is worth, I agree with his comments below.

Jari

On 10 Jun 2015, at 05:50, Suresh Krishnan <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 22:42:22 +0200

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 02:50:41AM +0000,
 Suresh Krishnan <[email-masked]> wrote 
 a message of 66 lines which said:

> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. 

Thanks for the review. I just posted -06, which addresses some of your
remarks. I discuss here only the ones which were not addressed.

> Not really sure if it belongs in this document, but I personally
> think that DNScrypt is probably worth at least a passing mention as
> it specifically deals with encryption of DNS requests.

We give the priority to drafts adopted by working groups, which is the
case for the two mentioned in the Security Considerations as possible
solutions.

> Why is there a separate class of references for URI? Shouldn't this
> be folded into either Normative or Informative?

Default behavior of xml2rfc.