This document has progressed very well and is nearly ready for publication.
Related to an earlier thread about intended status: "Informational" is most
appropriate here because the document is all about proposed operations but no
"best current practice". There is no problem with WGs producing In
... and now I'm replying to the rest of the comments.
I've integrated them and posted a new version with the clarifications
on a *positive* **trust anchor** under an NTA.
I'm not very happy with the text I added, if others have better text
happy to consider it...
Huge thanks to Jinmei for the car
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations Working Group
of the IETF.
Title : Definition and Use of DNSSEC Negative Trust Anchors
Authors : Paul Ebersman
On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 12:24:13PM -0400, Warren Kumari wrote:
> The way that our resolver works is that the closest TA would win, and
> so a positive TA under a negative trust anchor *would* be used. To me
> this seems to be the obviously right thing to do, and so, unless
> anyone objects, I'll ad
[ Top post]
Only replying to the biggest issue here, will reply to the rest later today.
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 2:25 PM, 神明達哉 wrote:
> At Mon, 27 Apr 2015 18:58:10 -0400,
> Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
>> This starts a Working Group Last Call for Adoption for
>> draft-ietf-dnsop-negative-trust-anchors
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 2:25 PM, 神明達哉 wrote:
> At Fri, 24 Apr 2015 23:59:22 -0400,
> Warren Kumari wrote:
>
>> So, I have gone back through previous mail and it seems that this was
>> the only email that got missed.
>> Anyway, it seems that other folk also made similar comments, and so,
>> by -03,
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Casey Deccio wrote:
>within document itself and not necessarily beyond.
>
typo: there should be a "the" after "within".
Casey
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
On May 5, 2015, at 7:45 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
>
> Casey Deccio wrote:
>>
>> Glue records -- "[Records] which are not part of the
>> authoritative data [for a zone], and are address resource records for
>> the servers [in a subzone]. These RRs are only necessary if the name
>> server's na
Casey Deccio wrote:
>
> Glue records -- "[Records] which are not part of the
>authoritative data [for a zone], and are address resource records for
>the servers [in a subzone]. These RRs are only necessary if the name
>server's name is 'below' the cut, and are only used as part of a
>
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 12:01:21PM -0700, Paul Vixie wrote:
>
> after kashpureff, circular references are no longer allowed. XYZ.NET
> cannot have only nameservers named within within XYZ.ORG, if XYZ.ORG has
> only name servers named within XYZ.NET. that's because, due to cache
> poisoning risks,
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 03:54:26PM +,
Dan York wrote
a message of 107 lines which said:
> Would you support Ed Lewis’ modification of that text into this?
Yes
> "TLDs are often divided into ccTLDs, gTLDs and other categories;
> the division is a matter of policy in the root zone, and b
11 matches
Mail list logo
