Re: [apps-discuss] For consideration as an appsawg document:draft-hoffman-server-has-tls-03.txt

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Mon, 17 January 2011 15:19 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B06CA3A6F40 for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 07:19:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.71
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.71 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.336, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kGF5cgC4xDYt for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 07:19:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCD6A3A6F3E for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 07:19:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from MacBook-08.local (75-101-30-90.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [75.101.30.90]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p0HFM8QL082442 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 08:22:09 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
Message-ID: <4D345EA0.3000506@vpnc.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 07:22:08 -0800
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
References: <495232101.07985@cnnic.cn> <495246785.22018@cnnic.cn>
In-Reply-To: <495246785.22018@cnnic.cn>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] For consideration as an appsawg document:draft-hoffman-server-has-tls-03.txt
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 15:19:35 -0000

On 1/16/11 10:46 PM, Jiankang YAO wrote:
> This document also discusses The HASTLS Resource Record and requests
> that IANA allocate a new DNS resource record type called HASTLS from
> the data types range.
>
> I think that DNSEXT WG's comments are also important to the ADs and
> WG to consider whether this document happens to be fall in the scope
> of  APPSAWG.

Of course, getting input from the wide community is important. Note that 
for Resource Records, however, the DNSEXT WG is not the decider: the 
expert reviewer for the registry is. This is why the APPSAWG is a more 
appropriate place to discuss the semantics and desirability of the protocol.

(Also, given that I have not yet done a first attempt at a wire format 
for the new RRtype, it is certainly premature to even ask DNSEXT...)