On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 11:00:09PM -1000, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote:
> > Perhaps before we advance 6698 to full standard we really should
> > do a TLSAbis, incorporating the relevant bits of OPS. The standard
> > would be far more readable if it were not substantially refined by
> > a second document that is not in turn a full replacement.
>
> What that was meant to be a single document covering both of these
Is that a question or a statement?
For my part, I'd like to see DANE TLSA (6698) bis, with the relevant
bits from OPS inlined into the main document. Though first we need
to get OPS published.
--
Viktor.
_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
