Joe My email wasn't a statement that I don't think the work is relevant. It seems that interesting enough for the WG that there are two use cases: 1) the root zone; and 2) everything else.
I had spent some time looking the draft over and realizing it was marked standards track, and I think it would be easier to adopt for the the specific use case if it wasn't standards track. And, why not combine zone-digest with 7706bis? Tim On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 9:26 PM, John Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote: > In article <20180730002348.ga41...@isc.org> you write: > >A good point. Technically, I don't think there's anything in ZONEMD that > >couldn't be implemented with TXT; using a dedicated rrtype for the purpose > >is mere convenience. > > Well, heck, we could do the whole DNS with TXT records. But if it > were a TXT record, it'd either need a reserved prefix name or a > reserved string in the record to say what it is. As Mark noted, that > makes calculating the hash a lot more fiddly. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
