IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] CDS and/or CDNSKEY

Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net> Fri, 18 October 2013 16:05 UTC

Return-Path: <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 641A211E8257 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Oct 2013 09:05:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.45
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.45 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w-kbKp26MF0H for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Oct 2013 09:05:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.hardakers.net (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:187::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ADED11E8173 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Oct 2013 09:05:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:187:6d1e:6534:4595:42ac]) by mail.hardakers.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B7B9428220; Fri, 18 Oct 2013 09:05:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
To: Ondřej Surý <ondrej.sury@nic.cz>
References: <CE7257AA.D9AD%bdickson@verisign.com> <alpine.LFD.2.10.1310022330290.21614@bofh.nohats.ca> <201310031159387926584@cnnic.cn> <524D128A.5050701@nlnetlabs.nl> <F4E5DA98-0A19-4E0A-AF27-0FC83F7A560A@kumari.net> <alpine.LFD.2.10.1310031606040.28168@bofh.nohats.ca> <524E5747.3020708@nlnetlabs.nl> <C5EB17D8-80AB-4FCF-85B5-09EDBCA419E6@ogud.com> <B9CF170E-6F56-4912-B57C-2DAA6CE88E4C@kumari.net> <2777018E-AE0E-4781-AA6C-5F92E46B1CAD@kumari.net> <6D09907E-D290-4D31-8D35-F7C1F647171D@nic.cz>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 09:05:01 -0700
In-Reply-To: <6D09907E-D290-4D31-8D35-F7C1F647171D@nic.cz> ("Ondřej Surý"'s message of "Fri, 11 Oct 2013 09:50:42 +0200")
Message-ID: <0liowuwonm.fsf@wjh.hardakers.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.130008 (Ma Gnus v0.8) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>, Matthijs Mekking <matthijs@nlnetlabs.nl>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] CDS and/or CDNSKEY
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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, 18 Oct 2013 16:05:21 -0000

Ondřej Surý <ondrej.sury@nic.cz> writes:

>> Filename:	 draft-kumari-ogud-dnsop-cds
>
> I fully support this to go ahead, although I disagree with some parts
> of the document.

I also support the document, and specifically also prefer the two
different rrtypes for it.

> One (not so strong) thought – it might be actually good to split the
> "requirements" and the "protocol" part into separate documents.

I disagree with that; I don't think there is enough of a huge
requirement set to have them separated from the solution.

-- 
Wes Hardaker
Parsons

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email