Subject: [Dots] Comments on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-02

From: "Russ White" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2017 21:14:06 -0400

Y'all -- much less in the way of comments on this one -- but still one grammar comment, and a couple of points of discussion.

😊 /r

==
I would again question the focus on UDP, essentially disallowing QUIC. Allowing multiple transports might be useful.

==
First of all, a DOTS agent belongs to an domain, and that domain has an identity which can be authenticated and authorized. 

Probably would be better as something like --

First, a DOTS agent belongs to a domain; and the domain to which the DOTS server belongs has an identity which can...

==
[[EDITOR’S NOTE: we request working group feedback and discussion of operational considerations relating to coordinating multiple provider responses to a mitigation request.]]

One problem worth mentioning here would be one "customer" sending different redirects to multiple "providers" that result in a permanent routing loop. There does not seem to be any way to solve this within the DOTS framework that I can see, but it might be worth pointing out that this is a potential problem.

Another problem here is that of prioritizing various requests; there might want to be some mention here of how this is an issue that is not resolved in the protocol specification, but is rather expected to be solved in implementations. There may want to be a draft on this topic later on to discuss various strategies, and experience with them in actual deployments, but for this draft it just seems worth mentioning and leaving it at that.