On 2/8/24, 09:25, "DNSOP on behalf of Philip Homburg" wrote:
>whether fallback to NS/DS is encouraged by the operator of the zone.
>
>If DELEG is mainly used to signal that a secure transport, such as DoT, DoH,
>or DoQ, is available then falling back to NS/DS might be preferred (by the
>zone op
Chairs,
Quick questions
why a new list and what is that lists standing in the IETF?
Is this precursor for a BOF and possible new working group ?
thanks
Ólafur
On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 2:37 PM Paul Hoffman wrote:
> Greetings. After the DNSOP interim meeting last week, Warren set up a new
> maili
Prior to the news breaking that having two keys with the same key tag in a TLD
led to an outage in late January, I was debugging some analysis code of mine
that broke when a different TLD simultaneously published two DNSKEY resource
records with the same key tag. This code had been fixed once
>Agreed, I don't think that the protocol should prescribe what
>to do in case of "operational error". Differentiating an
>"operational error" from an actual malicious interference is
>very likely going to be a slippery slope. That being said, I
>think it will be useful for adop
From: Manu Bretelle
Date: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 14:19
To: Peter Thomassen
Cc: Edward Lewis , Ben Schwartz ,
"dnsop@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Re: General comment about downgrades vs. setting
expectations in protocol definitions
>Agreed, I don't think that the protocol shoul
Hi Petr,
On 2/8/24 11:10, Petr Menšík wrote:
I just found a draft regarding DNSSec solving post-quantum algorithms [1]. From
a talk about it on csnog.eu site. A very surprising fact for it is seems never
been mentioned here, where most DNSSec related standards were done recently.
It's a rese
Hello!
I just found a draft regarding DNSSec solving post-quantum algorithms
[1]. From a talk about it on csnog.eu site. A very surprising fact for
it is seems never been mentioned here, where most DNSSec related
standards were done recently. It might be just my inexperience, but it
seems to
