The difference is that Chrome won't use resolvers other than the ones you've configured yourself, and will simply opportunistically upgrade to DoH if they detect that those resolvers support it. 

In other words, there is no usurpation of administrative intent.

Royce

On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 7:30 AM Jay R. Ashworth <jra@baylink.com> wrote:
It's not clear to me whether Paul is expressing approval of the whole shebang
at this point, or just the one change they've made, but, just on first look,
I don't think that change addresses *my* distaste for DoH, as discussed in
last month's 100-poster.  :-)

https://www.zdnet.com/article/dns-over-https-google-hits-back-at-misinformation-and-confusion-over-its-plans/

TL;DR: they (Chrome) won't enable DoH unless it's being run from an internet
which they know supports it; there are apparently a list of 8-12 ISPs/etc
which are announcing such support.

Cheers,
-- jra

--
Jay R. Ashworth                  Baylink                       jra@baylink.com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates       http://www.bcp38.info          2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA      BCP38: Ask For It By Name!           +1 727 647 1274