On 26.7.2017 12:56, Tony Finch wrote:
> Joe Abley wrote:
>>
>> If anybody else here has thoughts about specific text or violent
>> objections to including QTYPE=RRSIG in general, please let me know (I
>> looked in the mail archive but couldn't find any there).
>
> I think it's helpful to mentio
Joe Abley wrote:
>
> If anybody else here has thoughts about specific text or violent
> objections to including QTYPE=RRSIG in general, please let me know (I
> looked in the mail archive but couldn't find any there).
I think it's helpful to mention RRSIG explicitly since it isn't
immediately obvi
Hi Petr, all,
With reference to:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/lZDnD1kCZQ1Zvm0YF6wbWtg
> 1. The casse QTYPE=RRSIG should be made more prominent so it is
> understood and not misused as ANY. There are implementations like Knot
> Resolver which are work around missing RRSIG rec