Re: [DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification fordraft-kumari-ogud-dnsop-cds-00.txt

2013-02-18 Thread Olafur Gudmundsson
On 18/02/2013 19:05, Stephan Lagerholm wrote: Warren Kumari, Monday, February 18, 2013 4:36 PM: Hi all, This is a compilation of two earlier drafts, draft-barwood-dnsop-ds- publish and draft-wkumari-dnsop-ezkeyroll. The basic idea remains the same -- allow operators to publish new (and stand

Re: [DNSOP] DNS in JSON (Was: DNSOP Meeting in Orlando/IETF86

2013-02-18 Thread Tony Finch
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > A few minutes to discuss draft-bortzmeyer-dns-json, "JSON format to > represent DNS data"? I'm specially interested by feedback about the > open questions listed in section 3.6 of -00 I think your first question, about a formal mechanism for documenting the field na

Re: [DNSOP] Posted draft-livingood-negative-trust-anchors-03

2013-02-18 Thread Tony Finch
Joe Abley wrote: > > You could compare it to DNS RBLs, too. You don't have to like it for it > to exist (you don't have to use it.) It doesn't need to be universally > liked to be useful. I agree with your point but there is also a difference. RBLs (and DNS response policy zones) create breakage

Re: [DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification fordraft-kumari-ogud-dnsop-cds-00.txt

2013-02-18 Thread Stephan Lagerholm
Warren Kumari, Monday, February 18, 2013 4:36 PM: > Hi all, > > This is a compilation of two earlier drafts, draft-barwood-dnsop-ds- > publish and draft-wkumari-dnsop-ezkeyroll. > > The basic idea remains the same -- allow operators to publish new (and > standby) DS records at the parent by publ

[DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-kumari-ogud-dnsop-cds-00.txt

2013-02-18 Thread Warren Kumari
Hi all, This is a compilation of two earlier drafts, draft-barwood-dnsop-ds-publish and draft-wkumari-dnsop-ezkeyroll. The basic idea remains the same -- allow operators to publish new (and standby) DS records at the parent by publishing them in their zone, signed with their current key. This

Re: [DNSOP] New draft-livingood-negative-trust-anchors-04

2013-02-18 Thread Mark Andrews
In message <51228dfb.3070...@ogud.com>, Olafur Gudmundsson writes: > Jason, in section 10 you talk about possible early removal the NTA when > validation succeeds but there may be instances where validation succeeds > when using a sub-set of the authoritative servers thus NTA should only > be r

Re: [DNSOP] New draft-livingood-negative-trust-anchors-04

2013-02-18 Thread Olafur Gudmundsson
Jason, in section 10 you talk about possible early removal the NTA when validation succeeds but there may be instances where validation succeeds when using a sub-set of the authoritative servers thus NTA should only be removed if all servers are providing "good" signatures. Furthermore what to

Re: [DNSOP] New draft-livingood-negative-trust-anchors-04

2013-02-18 Thread Livingood, Jason
Thanks for catching that - will correct this in -05. Jason On 2/18/13 10:57 AM, "Marco Davids (SIDN)" wrote: >Jason, > >On 17/02/2013 10:22, Livingood, Jason wrote: >>> Based on feedback yesterday on the list, I did a quick ­04 update > >Personally I would also have changed all references to RF

Re: [DNSOP] Adoption of as a WG work item?

2013-02-18 Thread Peter Koch
Dear WG, > Please respond by the end of next week, so that we could ask future > editors to submit a renamed -00 version by Monday, Feb 18. thanks to all who responded and especially to those three volunteer reviewers. However, we've not met the 5 reviewer threshold, so your chairs agreed the WG

Re: [DNSOP] New draft-livingood-negative-trust-anchors-04

2013-02-18 Thread Warren Kumari
On Feb 17, 2013, at 10:22 AM, "Livingood, Jason" wrote: > Based on feedback yesterday on the list, I did a quick –04 update, which is > now at > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-livingood-negative-trust-anchors/. > > > The are seven open issues documented at the end of the I-D. But t

Re: [DNSOP] DNS in JSON (Was: DNSOP Meeting in Orlando/IETF86

2013-02-18 Thread Warren Kumari
On Feb 18, 2013, at 11:22 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > On Feb 18, 2013, at 2:05 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 12:14:46PM +0100, >> Peter Koch wrote >> a message of 12 lines which said: >> >>> we would also like to solicit suggestions for agenda items from you. >>

Re: [DNSOP] DNS in JSON (Was: DNSOP Meeting in Orlando/IETF86

2013-02-18 Thread Paul Hoffman
On Feb 18, 2013, at 2:05 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 12:14:46PM +0100, > Peter Koch wrote > a message of 12 lines which said: > >> we would also like to solicit suggestions for agenda items from you. > > A few minutes to discuss draft-bortzmeyer-dns-json, "JSON fo

Re: [DNSOP] New draft-livingood-negative-trust-anchors-04

2013-02-18 Thread Marco Davids (SIDN)
Jason, On 17/02/2013 10:22, Livingood, Jason wrote: >> Based on feedback yesterday on the list, I did a quick –04 update Personally I would also have changed all references to RFC4641 into RFC6781. Regards, -- Marco ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf

Re: [DNSOP] New draft-livingood-negative-trust-anchors-04

2013-02-18 Thread Olafur Gudmundsson
On 17/02/2013 10:22, Livingood, Jason wrote: Based on feedback yesterday on the list, I did a quick –04 update, which is now at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-livingood-negative-trust-anchors/. The are seven open issues documented at the end of the I-D. But the most important questions

[DNSOP] DNS in JSON (Was: DNSOP Meeting in Orlando/IETF86

2013-02-18 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 12:14:46PM +0100, Peter Koch wrote a message of 12 lines which said: > we would also like to solicit suggestions for agenda items from you. A few minutes to discuss draft-bortzmeyer-dns-json, "JSON format to represent DNS data"? I'm specially interested by feedback abo