Right, my spidey senses were tingling, too. So I looked into the RFC's author, and noted his position as one of the champions of QUIC as HTTP/3, and his promoti

Right, my spidey senses were tingling, too. So I looked into the RFC's author, and noted his position as one of the champions of QUIC as HTTP/3, and his promotion of encrypted DNS (specifically DoH), and then an interesting article that on the surface sounds like it advocates for ensuring end users retain control of their DNS requests, but which actually advocates for burying the implementation of DNS in the OS and only exposing a control layer to the end user (e.g. an on/off toggle). [0] I can't pretend to have enumerated all the possible ramifications of this, but without more than a couple of paragraphs in an RFC which is essentially one particular example use case, I consider this a fairly suspicious addition to the URI spec specifically, when viewed in the context of how this might be used to obscure URLs (a subset of URI) from end users (and software running on end user machines). [0] https://www.mnot.net/blog/2019/06/11/endpoint_control https://www.mnot.net/blog/2019/06/11/endpoint_control