Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-multi-provider-dnssec-04: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Plea
On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 10:52 PM Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
Thank you for your review Roman.
--
> COMMENT:
> --
>
> Thank you for re
On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 10:24 PM Alissa Cooper wrote:
> Pete, thanks for your review. Shumon, thanks for your response. I entered
> a No Objection ballot.
>
Thank you Alissa!
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dn
On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 1:09 AM Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks for this document; it's pretty clear and it's good to have these
> procedures written down in a well-thought-out manner.
>
Thank you for your review Ben.
Section 3
>
>o It may also be the cas
On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 9:23 AM Robert Wilton via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
>
> My lack of domain knowledge made this document hard for me to understand,
> but
> given that this document as aimed at folks deploying DNS servers I don't
> really
> see that as a problem.
>
Thank you for
On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 10:10 PM Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Section 6.1, 6.2
>
> Should we say anything about when it's safe for a new ZSK to be used to
> sign responses?
>
I think, technically speaking, it is always safe to use a new ZSK, and the
only concern is
On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 3:48 PM Brian Dickson
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 10:10 PM Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <
> nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Section 6.1, 6.2
>>
>> Should we say anything about when it's safe for a new ZSK to be used to
>> sign responses?
>>
>
> I think, technically
Hi Shumon,
On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 11:44:30AM -0400, Shumon Huque wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 1:09 AM Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <
> nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > Thanks for this document; it's pretty clear and it's good to have these
> > procedures written down in a well-thought-out
