Document: draft-ietf-core-dns-over-coap Title: DNS over CoAP (DoC) Reviewer: Tommy Pauly Review result: Ready with Nits This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF discussion list for information. When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC tsv-art@xxxxxxxx if you reply to or forward this review. Thanks for a clearly written document, and another entry into the zoo of D-o-something protocols. From a transport perceptive, I don't see any particular concerns or issues raised by this document. Some nits: - "If the "alpn" SvcParam value for the service is "coap", a CoAP request for CoAP over TLS MUST be construct.": this sentence should end with "MUST be constructed". - "* The target name of the SVCB record MUST be set in the Uri-Host option if the resolved address for the target name differs from the destination address. Otherwise, the Uri-Host option MAY be set from the target name.": I suggest double checking (if you haven't already) with RFC 9461 and the authors of that and related documents if this would be expected or equivalent to the dohpath case. Generally, the target path names wouldn't be used for hostnames in URIs, in my experience. For example, RFC 9462 says "However, even when the TargetName is different (for example, if the DoH server had a TargetName of doh.example.com), the clients still check for the original known resolver name in the certificate." -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
