Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-2535typecode-change-05.txt
Samuel Weiler <weiler@tislabs.com> Thu, 13 November 2003 03:51 UTC
Received: from psg.com (mailnull@psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA25645 for <dnsext-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:51:35 -0500 (EST)
Received: from lserv by psg.com with local (Exim 4.24; FreeBSD 4.9) id 1AK8T3-0003oh-Jz for namedroppers-data@psg.com; Thu, 13 Nov 2003 03:48:25 +0000
Received: from [192.94.214.100] (helo=nutshell.tislabs.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24; FreeBSD 4.9) id 1AK8T1-0003oP-Nq for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2003 03:48:23 +0000
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by nutshell.tislabs.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id hAD3kGcl001576 for <namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:46:16 -0500 (EST)
Received: from filbert.tislabs.com(10.66.1.10) by nutshell.tislabs.com via csmap (V6.0) id srcAAAT4aaed; Wed, 12 Nov 03 22:46:14 -0500
Received: from localhost (weiler@localhost) by filbert.tislabs.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id hAD3kv65001415; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:46:57 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:46:57 -0500
From: Samuel Weiler <weiler@tislabs.com>
X-X-Sender: weiler@filbert
To: Mike StJohns <Mike.StJohns@nominum.com>
cc: namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-2535typecode-change-05.txt
In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.22.2.20031112223535.038ddaf0@localhost>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.55.0311122236070.929@filbert>
References: <200310131955.PAA23807@ietf.org> <Pine.GSO.4.55.0311111643470.24629@filbert> <6.0.0.22.2.20031112223535.038ddaf0@localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on psg.com
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=2.60
Sender: owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
> I actually didn't read this because it should be (e.g. I assumed it was) > subsumed by the -protocol document. Was the obvious bug carried over to > -protocol? No, it was not. It still may be worthwhile to read the document since, among other things, it makes IANA changes. While the bis doc set will include the relevant protocol details, it will presumably not repeat the IANA actions, and the IANA actions are the most signifigant changes between -04 and -05. This draft also discusses some of the motivation and history for the type code roll. FWIW, the bug in question presumably would have been fixed by the RFC Editor before publication. (Or in -06, since the IANA section still seems to be of concern to some.) -- Sam -- to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-2535typecode-… Internet-Drafts
- Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-2535typec… Samuel Weiler