[dnsext] Re: [IANA #1363508] [Errata Verified] RFC3445 (7836)

[Petr Špaček <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I'm late, but as an implemented who recently had to deal with SIG/KEY 
RRs I think an extra reference cannot hurt. It costs nothing and helps 
implementers to find their way in the maze of RFCs.

Petr Špaček
Internet Systems Consortium


On 11. 06. 24 4:28, Donald Eastlake wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> As the author of RFC 2931, I think there is no need to update the
> RRTYPE registry entries that reference RFC 2931 by including RFC 3445
> as an additional reference.
> 
> Thanks,
> Donald
> ===============================
>   Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   [phone] (cell)
>   2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
>   [e-mail]
> 
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 9:42 PM David Dong via RT
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> Following up; there are two references to RFC 2931 in https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters/ (by the SIG RR record); do we need to update any of these references?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> David Dong
>> IANA Services Sr. Specialist
>>
>> On Sat May 11 00:30:00 2024, david.dong wrote:
>>> Hi Eric,
>>>
>>> Following up; there are two references to RFC 2931 in
>>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters/ (by the SIG RR
>>> record); do we need to update any of these references?
>>>
>>> Thank you
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> David Dong
>>> IANA Services Sr. Specialist
>>>
>>> On Wed May 01 20:57:56 2024, david.dong wrote:
>>>> Hi Eric,
>>>>
>>>> There are two references to RFC 2931 in
>>>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters/ (by the SIG RR
>>>> record); do we need to update any of these references?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> David Dong
>>>> IANA Services Sr. Specialist
>>>>
>>>> On Tue Apr 23 14:04:20 2024, [e-mail] wrote:
>>>>> The following errata report has been verified for RFC3445,
>>>>>   "Limiting the Scope of the KEY Resource Record (RR)".
>>>>>
>>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>>> You may review the report below and at:
>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7836
>>>>>
>>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>>> Status: Verified
>>>>> Type: Technical
>>>>>
>>>>> Reported by: Ted Lemon <[e-mail]>
>>>>> Date Reported: 2024-03-04
>>>>> Verified by: Eric Vyncke (IESG)
>>>>>
>>>>> Section: GLOBAL
>>>>>
>>>>> Original Text
>>>>> -------------
>>>>> Updates: RFC2535
>>>>>
>>>>> Corrected Text
>>>>> --------------
>>>>> Updates: RFC2535, RFC2931
>>>>>
>>>>> Notes
>>>>> -----
>>>>> This is based on our experience that when writing draft-ietf-dnssd-
>>>>> srp, we had no idea that the KEY RR format was updated, because
>>>>> there
>>>>> was no reference to the updated format in the datatracker page for
>>>>> RFC2931. I think it makes sense to say that 3445 updates 2931,
>>>>> because
>>>>> it does so explicitly.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Verifier (Eric Vyncke) note --
>>>>> See also
>>>>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsext/bSBYA97VQItwQS26fpVdQocrvnA/
>>>>>
>>>>> I will request the IETF secretariat to update the datatracker.
>>>>>
>>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>>> RFC3445 (draft-ietf-dnsext-restrict-key-for-dnssec-04)
>>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>>> Title               : Limiting the Scope of the KEY Resource Record
>>>>> (RR)
>>>>> Publication Date    : December 2002
>>>>> Author(s)           : D. Massey, S. Rose
>>>>> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
>>>>> Source              : DNS Extensions
>>>>> Stream              : IETF
>>>>> Verifying Party     : IESG
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dnsext mailing list -- [e-mail]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dnsext mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]

-- 
Petr Špaček