Skip to main content

Structured Error Data for Filtered DNS
draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error-15

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, benno@NLnetLabs.nl, dnsop-chairs@ietf.org, dnsop@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error@ietf.org, evyncke@cisco.com, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: Protocol Action: 'Structured Error Data for Filtered DNS' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error-11.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Structured Error Data for Filtered DNS'
  (draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error-11.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Domain Name System Operations Working
Group.

The IESG contact persons are Mahesh Jethanandani, Éric Vyncke and Mohamed
Boucadair.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error/


Ballot Text

Technical Summary

   DNS filtering is widely deployed for various reasons, including
   network security.  However, filtered DNS responses lack structured
   information for end users to understand the reason for the filtering.
   Existing mechanisms to provide explanatory details to end users cause
   harm especially if the blocked DNS response is for HTTPS resources.

   This document updates RFC 8914 by signaling client support for
   structuring the EXTRA-TEXT field of the Extended DNS Error to provide
   details on the DNS filtering.  Such details can be parsed by the
   client and displayed, logged, or used for other purposes.

Working Group Summary

   Was there anything in the WG process that is worth noting?
   For example, was there controversy about particular points 
   or were there decisions where the consensus was
   particularly rough? 

Document Quality

   Are there existing implementations of the protocol?  Have a 
   significant number of vendors indicated their plan to
   implement the specification?  Are there any reviewers that
   merit special mention as having done a thorough review,
   e.g., one that resulted in important changes or a
   conclusion that the document had no substantive issues?  If
   there was a MIB Doctor, Media Type, or other Expert Review,
   what was its course (briefly)?  In the case of a Media Type
   Review, on what date was the request posted?

Personnel

   The Document Shepherd for this document is Benno Overeinder. The
   Responsible Area Director is Éric Vyncke.

IANA Note

  (Insert IANA Note here or remove section)

RFC Editor Note