Re: [DNSOP] Key Management and Provisioningl was Re: .PR ...

Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> Fri, 11 September 2009 22:21 UTC

Return-Path: <jabley@hopcount.ca>
X-Original-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71C8B3A6A96 for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Sep 2009 15:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ge768C+VhgEC for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Sep 2009 15:21:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from monster.hopcount.ca (monster.hopcount.ca [216.235.14.38]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC8A53A69AE for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Sep 2009 15:21:55 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=monster; d=hopcount.ca; h=Received:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:X-Mailer; b=eIDd0l8l+9uQRTQA4J8vM4kzPAbTOER4a5gMjE5TgUASML7ydlxHpTgOlkoIbQhflGlhtry0psxCcsocr3Iuj1t9GBN1Sf7IjP2aro2HhgrOEs7lo8F7xsf7hN6cXR6V;
Received: from [69.206.66.198] (helo=[192.168.0.3]) by monster.hopcount.ca with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <jabley@hopcount.ca>) id 1MmEVg-000N3o-Hy; Fri, 11 Sep 2009 22:22:29 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1076)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
In-Reply-To: <D57370BF-625F-43E7-B9F9-A30A70F69BD6@bondis.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 18:22:24 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <5E546D3E-4468-4BE0-82B6-79B96DC1752E@hopcount.ca>
References: <20090908150823.GA30391@nic.fr> <alpine.LFD.1.10.0909081148270.9233@newtla.xelerance.com> <a06240800c6cc38daf7de@[10.31.200.192]> <alpine.LFD.1.10.0909081307090.9233@newtla.xelerance.com> <68F05A6E-256D-4C61-B03D-82E9E949349F@virtualized.org> <a06240800c6cc563a4381@[10.31.200.192]> <4AE266E3-E9ED-48D4-BEEE-41FB5A547392@virtualized.org> <a06240801c6cc67e5678b@[10.31.200.192]> <F6A9960F-44A8-4B97-A353-10B3578BA08E@virtualized.org> <a0624080ac6ceff5a54fd@[10.31.200.192]> <A4DC1D4D-3CC5-4BB7-A724-72BEBD0EA321@virtualized.org> <alpine.LFD.1.10.0909101705260.28494@newtla.xelerance.com> <AAC4D2B2-05A3-4211-A9B1-11C544E4433F@dnss.ec> <CABFFA80-22C1-4147-98EA-5936AE729779@bondis.org> <9BD1D276-1445-47E6-8091-DC33653AFD30@dnss.ec> <AFC0834C-3BB3-4C00-9168-CD27CF523C74@bondis.org> <24C088B4-3AB4-433D-9B18-82B919246690@dnss.ec> <D57370BF-625F-43E7-B9F9-A30A70F69BD6@bondis.org>
To: joao damas <joao@bondis.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1076)
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org, Roy Arends <roy@dnss.ec>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Key Management and Provisioningl was Re: .PR ...
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 22:21:56 -0000

On 2009-09-11, at 15:03, joao damas wrote:

> and you would be right do so, IMHO. the fact that dlv.isc.org didn't  
> pick up the .pr key is an issue that rest entirely with ISC (then  
> again, we are all learning operational practices in this DNSSEC  
> business at this time)

(to pick a message more or less at random to respond to)

Is there an implication from the presence of this thread on this list  
that:

(a) general, non-wg, operational matters are on-topic for this list, or

(b) this is a support channel for the ITAR, or ISC's DLV, or the .PR  
registry?

I can see that some feedback about novel operational problems relating  
to DNSSEC are useful to raise since they might stimulate a desire to  
work on documents. But the current state of the thread has me  
scratching my head a bit. Perhaps I just need to get a life.

My $0.02 Canadian, on a rainy Friday afternoon.


Joe