Re: Last Call: Simple Secure Domain Name System (DNS) Dynamic Update to Proposed Standard

[Olafur Gudmundsson <[e-mail]>]

At 11:49 AM 6/2/00 , Thomas Narten wrote:
>The IESG <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>> The IESG has received a request from the DNS Extensions Working Group
>> to consider Simple Secure Domain Name System (DNS) Dynamic Update
>> <draft-ietf-dnsext-simple-secure-update-01.txt> as a Proposed Standard.
>> This will replace/obsolete RFC2137, currently a Proposed Standard.
>
>> The IESG will also consider Domain Name System Security (DNSSEC)
>> Signing Authority <draft-ietf-dnsext-signing-auth-01.txt> as a Proposed
>> Standard, updating RFC2535
>
>Both of these IDs would appear to be significant replacements of their
>corresponding RFCs. Also, when a new RFC replaces on old one, its
>expected to include a "Changes relative to RFC XXX" section in them to
>help implementors understand what has changed. That might not make
>sense here, i.e., is this replacement vs. changing.

"Domain Name System Security Signing Authority" is a minor update to RFC2535 
it restricts the set of keys that can sign DNS data to zone keys at APEX.
This is a great simplification that is only possible as RFC2137 is obsoleted
by the other draft.  RFC2137 requires that other keys can sign data. 

Both documents contains in section 1 list of obsoleted RFCs and sections 
affected, but that should be broken out into "Changes .... " sections. 

>
>Question: should either of the two RFCs actually be reclassified as
>Historic, as opposed to just being obsoleted? If there is little or no
>deployment and the point is to not have anyone implement the old RFCs,
>reclassifying them to historic might be the way to go.
>

I thought Historic status is reserved for documents that are not replaced by
any other document. But in this case the protocol change is significant 
enough to warrant moving RFC2137 to historic and consider the new one a 
new protocol ? 
But my vote is to obsolete rather than move to historic. 


	Olafur



to unsubscribe send a message to [e-mail] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.