Yesterday, we published the DoH, ODoH and μODoH server application, modoh-server. The naming of modoh-server was from the original name of μODoH, Mutualized Oblivious DNS over HTTPS.
doh-auth-proxy was designed to fully leverage the functionalities of μODoH in addition to DoH and ODoH. IMHO, the naming convention of client and server software should be consistent, and hence the naming modoh-proxy would be better than doh-auth-proxy.
Any opinion?
Yesterday, we published the DoH, ODoH and μODoH server application,
modoh-server. The naming ofmodoh-serverwas from the original name of μODoH, Mutualized Oblivious DNS over HTTPS.doh-auth-proxywas designed to fully leverage the functionalities of μODoH in addition to DoH and ODoH. IMHO, the naming convention of client and server software should be consistent, and hence the namingmodoh-proxywould be better thandoh-auth-proxy.Any opinion?