On Mar 20, 2010, at 1:50 AM, George Barwood wrote:
Enshrining tho shalt never fragment into the Internet Architecture is
dangerous, and will cause far MORE problems. Having something which
regularly exercises fragmentation as critical to the infrastructure and we
wouldn't have this problem
Colleagues
This is a status update on RFC4641bis. Please refer to links provided for more
details on the issues. I have no particular issues I need to discuss in the
face to face meeting and will present what is written below in a somewhat
condensed form. If folk have something they would
- Original Message -
From: Nicholas Weaver nwea...@icsi.berkeley.edu
To: George Barwood george.barw...@blueyonder.co.uk
Cc: Nicholas Weaver nwea...@icsi.berkeley.edu; dnsop@ietf.org
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 2:26 PM
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Should root-servers.net be signed
On Mar
On Sat, 20 Mar 2010, Olaf Kolkman wrote:
- http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/svn/rfc4641bis/trunk/open-issues/NSEC-NSEC3
That still states:
as well as no algorithm choice for SHA-256
That's been resolved now, see http://www.bind9.net/dns-sec-algorithm-numbers
RSASHA256 has DNSKEY algorihtm 8
On Mar 20 2010, Paul Wouters wrote:
On Sat, 20 Mar 2010, Olaf Kolkman wrote:
- http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/svn/rfc4641bis/trunk/open-issues/NSEC-NSEC3
That still states:
as well as no algorithm choice for SHA-256
That's been resolved now, see
