At Thu, 6 Oct 2016 03:00:36 -0400, Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The authors for this document have addressed some lingering outstanding > issues, and it appears ready for Working Group Last Call. > > This starts a Working Group Last Call for: > draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-key-tag > > Current versions of the draft is available here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-key-tag/ > > Please review the draft and offer relevant comments. Also, if someone > feels the document is *not* ready for publication, please speak out with > your reasons. I've read the 03 version of the draft. I think it's basically ready for publication. However, I have two new points to discuss, which may result in some non-trivial updates (although they may not be substantial to warrant another WGLC). 1. regarding recursive resolvers (4.2.2.1), I wonder whether we want to explicitly note that the recursive servers MUST NOT (I think) forward a DNSKEY query with an EDNS key tag option when it already has it in the cache simply because the set of key tags in the originally query is different from its own set of key tags. 2. regarding the following note in Section 5.3: [ Note RFC1035 says NULL RRs are not allowed in master files, but I believe that to be incorrect ] perhaps we should officially update RFC1035 and clarify that NULL is now allowed in master files? Even if the usage in the authoritative side (such as the example shown in Section 5.3.1) is not a normative part of this draft, the use of NULL RR is, and so it would be better to assure such configuration won't be considered a non-compliant setting. -- JINMEI, Tatuya _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop