Where's the measurement of existing use? Do we understand to what extent this label is already in use, and potentially has operational issues?
-G On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@vpnc.org> wrote: > On 19 Mar 2017, at 18:44, Suzanne Woolf wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> The INT Area Director who oversees the homenet WG, Terry Manderson, has >> asked DNSOP participants to review >> https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03.txt >> <https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03.txt>, "Special Use Top >> Level Domain '.homenet’”, with the following aspects in mind: >> >> 1) in terms of RFC6761 >> >> 2) in terms of the _operational_ position of an unsigned entry in the root >> zone as requested in this document, to break the chain of trust for local >> DNS resolution of .homenet names. >> >> This document is the product of the homenet WG, which has asked the IESG >> to approve it for publication, so our comments are strictly advisory to the >> IESG. There was some discussion of the draft on this list shortly after it >> appeared, in November 2016, but it’s always the AD’s prerogative to ask for >> additional review. > > > Clarifying question for Terry: do you want us reviewing it now, or after he > has released it for IETF Last Call? I ask because the draft's authors are > aware that there are still a bunch of 6761-ish issues (from two different > reviewers, of which I am one), so there might be refinements coming before > IETF Last Call, or maybe not. > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
