--On Thursday, July 15, 2010 16:08 -0700 The IESG
iesg-secret...@ietf.org wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter
to consider the following document:
- 'Representation and Verification of Domain-Based Application
Service Identity in Certificates Used with
On Fri, 16 Jul 2010, Tony Finch wrote:
unbound requires trust anchors in DS format which is somewhat more
convenient, though you still have to edit IANA's XML to convert it into
master file format.
You can also use DNSKEY statements in unbound:
~ grep trusted-keys /etc/unbound/unbound.conf
Hi, Cyrus,
On 7/16/2010 6:11 PM, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
Hi Joe,
--On July 16, 2010 2:55:42 PM -0700 Joe Touch to...@isi.edu wrote:
1) the document contains a section discussing the registration of caldev
and caldevs (Sec 3); a corresponding section for carddev and carddevs
should be added.
As
At 5:22 AM -0400 7/17/10, John C Klensin wrote:
(1) In Section 4.4.1, the reference should be to the IDNA2008
discussion. The explanations are a little better vis-a-vis the
DNS specs and it is a bad idea to reference an obsolete spec.
+1. I accept blame on this one, since I was tasked on an
Folks,
Nomcom has been an integral part of the IETF for nearly 20 years.
A number of us have been developing a set of recommendations designed to adapt
the Nomcom process to better match current realities of the IETF community. The
draft has progressed far enough to call for public
Hi Joe,
--On July 17, 2010 8:19:13 AM -0700 Joe Touch to...@isi.edu wrote:
As noted in the fourth paragraph of the introduction, the CardDAV
service types have been defined in [I-D.ietf-vcarddav-carddav] currently
in the RFC Editor queue.
The information from section 11 of that draft should
On 17 jul 2010, at 21.00, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
The whole basis of .well-know is that web clients want fixed paths for
finding out things about web servers. This spec simply extends that to allow
CalDAv and CardDAV clients to quickly find the paths to their relevant
services.
As I have said
Hi, Cyrus,
On 7/17/2010 12:00 PM, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
...
The SRV registry exists even in advance of IANA's management thereof.
Further, aliases have no meaning in the SRV registry - they are
meaningful only in the IANA ports registry, and only insofar as multiple
strings are assigned the same
On 17 jul 2010, at 21.27, Joe Touch wrote:
The appropriate solution for a port discovered via SRV records is to use TXT
records.
And, for the ones that have not followed the whole history of this last call,
my view is that a new RR type is needed, and I propose a URI resource record
that as
Patrick,
Are you suggesting a new RR instead of the SRV or in addition to the SRV?
The latter seems useful; the former begs the question of how many SRV
variants we would want.
Joe
On 7/17/2010 12:33 PM, Patrik Fältström wrote:
On 17 jul 2010, at 21.27, Joe Touch wrote:
The appropriate
On 2010-07-18 03:48, Dave CROCKER wrote:
...
At:
http://www.bbiw.net/recent.html#nomcom2010
there is a copy of the Full Proposal, and a Summary which primarily
contains just the recommendations.
Um, we have this new system called Internet-Drafts, whereby proposals
are issued by a
Brian, it wasn't ready. Are you trying to say something beyond asking why it
wasn't submitted as a draft? I don't understand the subtext.
Scott
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
On 7/17/2010 1:49 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
http://www.bbiw.net/recent.html#nomcom2010
...
Um, we have this new system called Internet-Drafts,
...
Brian,
There is? Good to know. I'll try to use it for the next version.[*]
And now that we've traded the requisite sarcasm...
As
--On Saturday, July 17, 2010 08:42 -0700 Paul Hoffman
paul.hoff...@vpnc.org wrote:
...
(2) In Section 4.4.2, note that there are definitional and
procedural problems if one tries to talk about a single rule
for full domain names. It is possible, and has been the only
option until very
At 8:57 PM -0400 7/17/10, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Saturday, July 17, 2010 08:42 -0700 Paul Hoffman
paul.hoff...@vpnc.org wrote:
...
(2) In Section 4.4.2, note that there are definitional and
procedural problems if one tries to talk about a single rule
for full domain names. It is possible,
--On Saturday, July 17, 2010 19:05 -0700 Paul Hoffman
paul.hoff...@vpnc.org wrote:
...
In any event,
the reason it occurred to me as something that might be useful
to say here is that the functions of this document would be,
IMO, particularly sensitive to having someone want to store a
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 04:29:07PM -0700, Paul Hoffman wrote:
At 4:08 PM -0700 7/15/10, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Representation and Verification of Domain-Based Application Service
Identity in
17 matches
Mail list logo
