IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-belyavskiy-rfc5933-bis

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Wed, 03 June 2020 21:17 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 4C01C3A0FB6; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 14:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AMWp9A0g3Had; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 14:17:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2A413A0FB4; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 14:17:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49chZF6mg7zMBd; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 23:17:25 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1591219045; bh=/tpI/jrGScuDvZ5fq6tKkzGdG6qT+Kg8bgMuFw2kIYM=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=riUi36EzQc21pE7ty31eRIs5Wfk7LxwI1VgGJUJfP/Og01RehErFZUPmzSOwlr+sZ AgyKTTOrllCvW0eAY+fRvTraRhFAjRbvldPJ29A+KLdPeB1G67Z+tNVV90hiGnI14T ril+EWDYUNtRgaOVX/6JBGdvwJopnFB5OrQ9e908=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DbjOh4xyvmDk; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 23:17:25 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 23:17:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DBB126029BA2; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 17:17:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7C6B66B7C; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 17:17:23 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2020 17:17:23 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, dnsop-chairs <dnsop-chairs@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CADyWQ+H4713BnZDntTuVW0FrO59zZ9NFJ=J=n9JFFq2zmfy2pQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.22.394.2006031709030.22728@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <CADyWQ+H4713BnZDntTuVW0FrO59zZ9NFJ=J=n9JFFq2zmfy2pQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/LmxtoYIrwiAEzyFp2SAz8FHAboo>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-belyavskiy-rfc5933-bis
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 03 Jun 2020 21:17:29 -0000

On Wed, 3 Jun 2020, Tim Wicinski wrote:

> As we stated in the meeting and in our chairs actions, we're going to run
> regular call for adoptions over next few months.  
> We are looking for *explicit* support for adoption.
> 
> This starts a Call for Adoption for draft-belyavskiy-rfc5933-bis

I support adoption, willing to review and contribute txt.

Note, the DS in the example in section 4.1 seems to be using 5 as
the assigned number, but this should probably be a TBA2 for now :)

Unless, an early code point has already been assigned, and looking
at the iana table the next available value is indeed 5 :)

Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email