Hello. I didn't speak but I'd still like to indicate my support. Requiring "Standards Action" just to allocate algorithm numbers seems quite an overkill. I'd find it healthy to split that into an easier step, so it's also clearly separable from endorsing or even requiring support for those algorithms (documents like RFC 8624).
Behavior with unsupported algorithms isn't ideal but it's specified and seems OK to me. People signing with less supported algorithms will naturally be put at a disadvantage, but they do know the tradeoff beforehand. And... without allocated numbers you don't really want to deploy the algorithm in validators, so it's a bit chicken-egg situation. --Vladimir | Knot Resolver dev. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
