Moin,

> I really would like to avoid mentioning RFC9539, as people might look
> at this after we got DELEG to work with encrypted transports as the
> way how a recursive resolver should discover encrypted transports to
> authorities and it clearly is not the way. Also the use of encrypted
> transports even between recursive and auth pre dates this RFC. So
> IMHO we should just say that now and in the future recursive can use
> other transports and then continue with the text you have.

I see your point; Also, I think that removing the explicit reference to
RFC9539 does not really take that much away. I adjusted the text to now
start with:

<===
   Note: Please note that this document only explicitly discusses DNS-
   over-TCP and DNS-over-UDP.  However, several other transport methods
   between recursive and authoritative DNS severs exit, including DNS
   over various encrypted transports.
===>

Thoughts?

With best regards,
Tobias

-- 
Dr.-Ing. Tobias Fiebig
T +31 616 80 98 99
M [email protected]

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to