Re: [dnsext] [dane] Aiming towards some specific wording

[Edward Lewis <[e-mail]>]

(Took DANE off because I'm not on the list.)

At 20:10 -0800 11/21/11, Matt McCutchen wrote:

>That's great, RFC 4035 has a totally different definition of
>"indeterminate" than RFC 4033.

You're right.  When I answered I went to 4035 because it is the 
"protocol mod" and not 4034 because it was "records".  I usually 
ignore 4033 because it's "intro" and has no requirements language in 
it.  That's just to explain why I quoted 4035 (because these kind of 
terminology things run rampant in RFCs) and why I didn't quote 4033.

Not that 4033 is any less wrong than 4035.  I just ordinarily look at 
4034/4035 more.

Here's what '33 says:

#   Indeterminate: There is no trust anchor that would indicate that a
#   specific portion of the tree is secure.  This is the default
#   operation mode.

Certainly different from 4035 and what I would assume was the right 
way to define indeterminate.
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis             
NeuStar                    You can leave a voice message at [phone]

Vote for the word of the day:
"Papa"razzi - father that constantly takes photos of the baby
Corpureaucracy - The institution of corporate "red tape"