Centralized DNS over HTTPS (DoH) Implementation Issues and Risks
draft-livingood-doh-implementation-risks-issues-03

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2019-03-24
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
DOH                                                         J. Livingood
Internet-Draft                                                   Comcast
Intended status: Informational                            M. Antonakakis
Expires: September 25, 2019              Georgia Institute of Technology
                                                               B. Sleigh
                                                                  BT Plc
                                                             A. Winfield
                                                                     Sky
                                                          March 24, 2019

    Centralized DNS over HTTPS (DoH) Implementation Issues and Risks
           draft-livingood-doh-implementation-risks-issues-03

Abstract

   The DNS over HTTPS (DoH) protocol is specified in RFC8484.  This
   document considers Centralized DoH deployment, which seems one likely
   way that DoH may be implemented, based on recent industry discussions
   and testing.  This describes that implementation model, as well the
   potential associated risks and issues.  The document also makes
   recommendations pertaining to the implementation of DoH, as well as
   recommendations for further study prior to widespread adoption.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 25, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents

Livingood, et al.      Expires September 25, 2019               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft       Centralized DoH Issues & Risks           March 2019

   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Separating the Protocol from Implementation Issues  . . . . .   2
   3.  Network Operators Are Interested in Deploying DoH . . . . . .   3
   4.  Centralized DoH Defined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  Centralization vs. De-Centralization of Services  . . . . . .   4
   6.  Centralized DoH Assumption: Enabled/Centralized by Default  .   5
   7.  Potential for Rapid Centralized DoH Adoption  . . . . . . . .   5
   8.  Potential Technical Risks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   9.  Potential Business Risks  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   10. Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   11. Document Reviewer Acknowlegedments  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
   13. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
   14. Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
   15. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     15.1.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     15.2.  URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   Appendix A.  Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
   Appendix B.  Open Issues  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23

1.  Introduction

   The DNS over HTTPS (DoH) protocol is specified in [RFC8484].  This
   document considers Centralized DoH deployment, which seems one likely
   way that DoH may be implemented, based on recent industry discussions
   and testing.  This describes that implementation model, as well the
   potential associated risks and issues.  The document also makes
   recommendations pertaining to the implementation of DoH, as well as
   recommendations for further study prior to widespread adoption.

2.  Separating the Protocol from Implementation Issues

   This document is not intended as a critique of the DoH protocol
   itself, which can be a valued addition to the Internet and appears to
Show full document text