Consider revising / removing DID Resolution Architecture

[jandrieu]

This section presents options that might happen rather than representing what we've standardized as how you should use the technology.

To wit, proxying resolvers is a security and privacy risk and, IMO, should not be introduced in a normative section.

[peacekeeper]

The section "Proxied Resolution" is a sub-sub-section of "DID Resolution Architectures". It's very misleading to mention this is a reason for removing (or marking at risk) an entire section. I agree that proxied resolution is problematic in many ways, but it's something that people are already doing today, so we should say something about it in the spec and provide guidance, rather than just ignoring it.

This section is currently marked as at risk and is likely to be replaced with content from the the DID Resolution Threat Model.

This sentence that was introduced in #346 doesn't make much sense to me to be honest. The Threat Model work seems useful, but it feels rather immature/incomplete right now, and I think it would be complementary to "DID Resolution Architectures", rather than replacing it.