Re: [dane] Start of WGLC for draft-ietf-dane-registry-acronym

James, 

Thanks for the edits I applied them, 
PKIX-CA vs TA I'm not sure what the consensus of the WG was and ask chairs to rule on that. 

	Olafur

On Sep 19, 2013, at 6:00 PM, James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> wrote:

> PKIX-TA looks better than PKIX-CA; CA makes it look like it has to be an
> association to a root cert.
> 
> It would be nice to have a better short description for type 3 than
> Domain-issued certificate, notwithstanding the existance of that string
> in rfc 6698.  DANE isn't about issuing certs, but rather about
> establishing trust paths to them.  But I cannot come up with an
> alternative.... 
> 
> Nits:
> 
> The paragraph: "It is expected that DANE parser's in applications and
> DNS software MAY adopt parsing the acronyms for each field, installed
> base MAY NOT get updated." could use better grammar.  Perhaps:
> 
>  s/each field, installed base/each field, but the installed base/
> 
> And perhaps /MAY NOT/may not/.  Unlike the first MAY, the may not isn't
> really a 2119.  (The Nits link agrees.)
> 
> In the xml, I'd do:
> 
>   s(<c>CA     constraint</c>)(<c>CA constraint</c>)
> 
> it should look better in the output.
> 
> -JimC
> -- 
> James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com>         OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dane mailing list
> dane@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane