Hi there, Warren has no authority here anymore - I'd suggest that Med should be substituted.
W On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 4:51 PM, Sarah Tarrant < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi John, Johan, Peter, and *Warren, > > *AD review - Warren - Regarding the following nit from Peter: > > Appendix A.2 > OLD (current, after RFC editing) > [DNSSEC-AUTO] > NEW > [RFC8901] > > (Rationale: the DNSSEC-AUTO draft was anticipated to be published before > this but was not; the currently correct informative reference therefore is > RFC 8901.) > > Please review the informative reference update and let us know if this > change is approved: > Removed: I-D.ietf-dnsop-dnssec-automation > Replaced with: RFC 8901 (which was already an informative reference) > > Best viewed at: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859-auth48diff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859-auth48rfcdiff.html > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Peter, John, and Johan - Thank you for your replies. We have updated the > document accordingly and have marked your approval on the AUTH48 status > page for this document (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9589). > > We will await Warren's approval prior to moving this document forward in > the publication process. > > The updated files have been posted here (please refresh): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859.txt > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859.pdf > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859.xml > > The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859-diff.html (comprehensive diff) > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859-auth48diff.html (AUTH48 > changes only) > > Note that it may be necessary for you to refresh your browser to view the > most recent version. > > For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9859 > > Thank you, > Sarah Tarrant > RFC Production Center > > On Sep 11, 2025, at 5:28 AM, Johan Stenstam < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > > A) FYI, regarding: > > We updated "native" to "built-in" and "traditional" to "original". Please > verify. > > I approve this change. > > B) Regarding: > > Current: > Therefore, it is RECOMMENDED that the child delay sending > notifications to the recipient until a consistent public view of the > pertinent records is ensured. > > Perhaps: > Therefore, it is RECOMMENDED that the child would delay sending > notifications to the recipient until a consistent public view of the > pertinent records could be ensured. > > I approve this change. > > Please review the document carefully to ensure satisfaction as we do not > make changes once it has been published as an RFC. > > For a clear record, please send approvals after viewing the document in > its current form. > > The updated files have been posted here (please refresh): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859.txt > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859.pdf > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859.xml > > The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859-diff.html (comprehensive diff) > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9859-auth48diff.html (AUTH48 > changes only) > > I have reviewed the entire updated document and have no objections. That > said, I do agree with Peter that his suggested change would be an > improvement (but it is not a show-stopper): > > CURRENT > For example, when receiving a NOTIFY(CDS) message for "example.com" > with agent domain "errors.ns1.example.net", and when the requested DS > update is found to break the delegation, then the following report > query may be made (preferably over TCP): > > NEW > For example, when receiving a NOTIFY(CDS) message for "example.com" > with agent domain "errors.ns1.example.net", and when the requested DS > update is found to break the delegation, then the following report > query with EDE code 6 (DNSSEC Bogus) may be made, preferably over TCP: > > Regards, > Johan Stenstam > >
-- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
