As authors of draft-sheth-identifiers-dns (included as an informative reference 
in draft-sheurich-acme-dns-persist), we are supportive of seeing this draft be 
adopted as it can help address challenges of using non-persistent approaches we 
see today.

 

One change we recommend would be to align the treatment of DNSSEC in this draft 
with the upcoming changes to draft-ietf-dnsop-domain-verification-techniques 
(DCV BCP) specified in 
https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/draft-ietf-dnsop-domain-verification-techniques/pull/188/files.
  Any future version of draft-sheth-identifiers-dns will also align with this 
change.

 

Adopting such language would change 7.7.1 of this draft from SHOULD validate 
DNSSEC signatures to a MUST use a DNSSEC validating resolver.  From our 
perspective, it is important that if a domain name has opted to use DNSSEC that 
it continues to be protected by the security properties of DNSSEC.  The cited 
text would not prevent non-DNSSEC enabled domain names from using 
dns-persist-01 or using multi-perspective validation as currently specified.

 

Thanks!

Swapneel Sheth

 

 

From: Mike Ounsworth <[email protected]> 
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2025 11:13 AM
To: IETF ACME <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Acme] Call-for-Adoption for draft-sheurich-acme-dns-persist

 

Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe. 
Hi ACME!

 

This thread begins a two-week Call-for-Adoption for 
draft-sheurich-acme-dns-persist, which will end 2025-10-10.

 

Please speak for or against adopting this document as a working group item.


-Mike

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to