Yes, I believe that suggestion is much stronger and expresses the intent and
meaning better.
Thanks,
Scott
-Original Message-
From: DNSOP On Behalf Of Hollenbeck, Scott
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 1:19 PM
To: linda.dun...@futurewei.com
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: [DNSOP] DNS for
Linda Dunbar wrote:
>Thank you very much for suggesting using the Globally unique domain name and
>having subdomains not resolvable outside the organization.
>I took some of your wording into the section. Please let us know if the
>description can be improved.
Thanks. I think that covers a
Paul Vixie wrote:
>if the names are global then they will be unique and DNS itself will handle
>the decision of how to route questions to the right authority servers.
>...
>first i hope you can explain why the simpler and existing viral DNS paradigm
>(all names are global and unique) is
first step with real security
benefits. And it's a step that can be followed and built upon with further
enhancements later.
Scott
-Original Message-
From: Nicholas Weaver [mailto:nwea...@icsi.berkeley.edu]
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 3:08 PM
To: Morizot Timothy S
Cc: Nicholas Weaver
Warren Kumari wrote:
Over on the BIND-Users list there is currently a discussion of
fema.net (one the Federal Emergency Management Agency domains)
being DNSSEC borked
(https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/2014-October/094142.html)
This is an example of the sort of issues that an NTA
