Skip to main content

Early Review of draft-ietf-dnsop-integration-01
review-ietf-dnsop-integration-01-dnsdir-early-tale-2026-02-13-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-dnsop-integration
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 02)
Type Early Review
Team DNS Directorate (dnsdir)
Deadline 2026-02-12
Requested 2026-01-22
Requested by Benno Overeinder
Authors Swapneel Sheth , Andrew Kaizer , Bryan Newbold , N. Johnson
I-D last updated 2026-04-07 (Latest revision 2026-04-07)
Completed reviews Secdir Early review of -00 by Stephen Farrell (diff)
Artart Early review of -00 by Barry Leiba (diff)
Dnsdir Early review of -01 by David C Lawrence (diff)
Assignment Reviewer David C Lawrence
State Completed
Request Early review on draft-ietf-dnsop-integration by DNS Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsdir/GO-eiHu8-JQ_628e8bSQ0mr9wXE
Reviewed revision 01 (document currently at 02)
Result Almost ready
Completed 2026-02-13
review-ietf-dnsop-integration-01-dnsdir-early-tale-2026-02-13-00
Hi all.	 A good	start on the things that people	should be considering
when planning to use DNS names in their applications.

Nit: I found "security, stability, and resiliency of the global DNS" 
to be a bit long to be so repetitive with occuring four times in just
two pages.  I think I'd modify the second and third occurrences to
just remove them, both because the other two occurrences make the
context clear and becaue "risks to the global DNS" and "could
negatively impact the application and the global DNS" read perfectly
well without the extra text.

Nit: "Failure to account for the domain name lifecycle [...] allowing users
other than the current registrant of the domain name to control the
domain name [...] which could lead to confusion."  Not just confusion,
but this goes pretty directly to the "security"	part of	the phrase
from the introduction. 	The next section, 3.2, mentions	the security
risk, but it'd be good to put it right up front the first time that
confusion comes up.

Nit: One thing I kept thinking as I was reading was that I'd really
like to see some sort of case study that illustrated the points being
made throughout section 3.  That exists in an appendix, but I (who
almost never reads the table of contents, perhaps a personal failing) 
didn't anticipate that an appendix was even coming and first thought
I was at the end when I hit the Informative References.

It's fine as an appendix, but it might help to indicate in the prose 
that it's coming.  Like maybe as a second paragraph to to section 3[.0],
something like "In Appendix A, we'll look at how the considerations
listed here relate to two different protocols' approaches to DNS Integration,"
or of course whatever wording you prefer.

Substance: To that end, it'd help if the examples in the appendices
more directly referenced each of the considerations described through
section 3.  The ENS one seems particularly light on useful reflection.