Telechat Review of draft-ietf-dprive-problem-statement-05
review-ietf-dprive-problem-statement-05-genart-telechat-krishnan-2015-07-16-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-dprive-problem-statement
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 06)
Type Telechat Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2015-06-09
Requested 2015-05-28
Authors St├ęphane Bortzmeyer
Draft last updated 2015-07-16
Completed reviews Genart Telechat review of -05 by Suresh Krishnan (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Suresh Krishnan 
State Completed
Review review-ietf-dprive-problem-statement-05-genart-telechat-krishnan-2015-07-16
Reviewed rev. 05 (document currently at 06)
Review result Ready with Issues
Review completed: 2015-07-16

Review
review-ietf-dprive-problem-statement-05-genart-telechat-krishnan-2015-07-16

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