On Mar 25, 2022, at 5:59 PM, Joey Deng
wrote:
> A possible format issue:
Thanks! That will be fixed in the next version.
> Since the description above mainly focuses on the new cryptography adopted by
> DNSSEC, I think it would make more sense to use title like:
>
> Additional Cryptographic
Hi,
A possible format issue:
>[RFC6840] brings a few additions into the core of DNSSEC. It makes
>NSEC3 [RFC5155] as much a part of DNSSEC as NSEC is. It also makes
>the SHA-2 hash function defined in [RFC4509] and [RFC5702] part of
>the core as well. # Cryptographic Algorithms
I'm the author, so I guess it goes without saying that I support its adoption.
Given the higher level of scrutiny that BCPs garner, I will incorporate
suggested text in versions of the draft if they are likely to reflect changes
that would garner consensus.
--Paul Hoffman
smime.p7s
The DNSOP WG has placed draft-wisser-dnssec-automation in state
Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Tim Wicinski)
The document is available at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wisser-dnssec-automation/
___
DNSOP mailing list
The DNSOP WG has placed draft-thomassen-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping in state
Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Tim Wicinski)
The document is available at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-thomassen-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping/
___
DNSOP
On Mar 25, 2022, at 16:28, Benno Overeinder wrote:
> With this email we start a period of two weeks for the call for adoption of
> draft-thomassen-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping on the mailing list.
>
> The draft is available here:
>
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Benno Overeinder wrote:
> As announced during the DNSOP meeting this week at the IETF 113, we are
> starting a Call for Adoption for the
> draft-thomassen-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping. With the survey we
> conducted before the last IETF 112, this draft was a clear
I have re-read this document after not reading it for a long time. It is in
excellent shape and should be sent to the IETF to become a BCP.
One note: the first paragraph in Section 2.4 is misplaced. Section 2 is about
considerations while Section 3 is about recommendations. The first paragraph
It appears that Benno Overeinder said:
>Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption
>by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.
I support adoption. It fills a longstanding gap in DNSSEC deployment.
Will review, tweak text.
R's,
John
As with the previous Call for Adoption today, at this week's DNSOP
meeting at IETF 113, we announced that we are initiating a Call for
Adoption for the draft-wisser-dnssec-automation. With the survey we
conducted for the last IETF 112, this draft was also a clear candidate.
With this email
> On Mar 24, 2022, at 4:07 PM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
>
> All
>
> If you attended the most recent DNSOP session, you've heard Warren speak
> about creating a BCP for DNSSEC, including all of the DNSSEC related RFCs,
> in order to make life easier for implementers and DNS operators.
>
>
As announced during the DNSOP meeting this week at the IETF 113, we are
starting a Call for Adoption for the
draft-thomassen-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping. With the survey we
conducted before the last IETF 112, this draft was a clear candidate.
With this email we start a period of two weeks for
I support adoption of this draft.
I appreciate that it acknowledges that deployment has been lower than some
advocates hoped, but I think the text following that is misplaced:
However, this low level of implementation
does not affect whether DNSSEC is a best current practice; it just
Thanks Paul for these!
I uploaded these into the datatracker, and I appended the chat logs to the
bottom, as we've come to realize there is also
good discussion going on there that is useful to capture.
Please check if there was anything attributed to you incorrectly, and let
the chairs know.
On Mar 25, 2022, at 00:08, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> If you attended the most recent DNSOP session, you've heard Warren speak
> about creating a BCP for DNSSEC, including all of the DNSSEC related RFCs,
> in order to make life easier for implementers and DNS operators.
Please do. As an author
15 matches
Mail list logo
