Nerds have been saying this about the HTTP-ization of protocols literally for decades, but HTTP's gradual assimilation of all other protocols has continued basically unimpeded.
Also: your primary objection to DoTLS is that networks block 53/tcp, and you say "same analysis applies to DNS over HTTP", except that, obviously, it does not: the whole reason DoH exists is to address that problem.
Finally, even though I believe over the long term that DoH will be successful and will eventually become the primary mechanism with which browsers look up hostnames, it doesn't have to be for DoH to solve, entirely, the real problems DNSSEC tried to solve.
M. Ahern was, I suspect, referring to the analysis of the first paragraph with "same".
In other words:
> if you think adding DNSSEC verification to a DNS library is hard, try adding a HTTP or a HTTP+TLS stack
A non-starter because I've written DNS servers and clients that saw widespread deployment and by far the biggest headache was networks that blocked TCP on port 53. DNS over TLS uses port 853. LOL Like that's gonna work better.
Same analysis applies to DNS over HTTP, except now you're adding a whole HTTP stack to your DNS library. For heaven's sake....
Why not just get the slow, painful death of the open internet over with and move everything to AWS. We can have AWS terminals using opaque, bespoke protocols for everything. We can merge the AWS and Blink/Chrome teams and we can delegate the development of all new novel network services to them.