Re: [DNSOP] Is DNSSEC a Best Current Practice?

[Tim Wicinski <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 4:49 AM Paul Vixie <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> Tim Wicinski wrote on 2022-03-11 01:38:
> > ... for several years now I have
> > felt those two need to be republished with all
> > the updated text from the many updates (28 for 1035, 18 for 1034) in new
> > documents.  This does not include any other
> > changes, and it feels like a thankless task.
> not just thankless but useless. a correctness preserving rewrite, from
> scratch, should be performed every few decades. (we're overdue.) a goal
> should be readability which will require NOT reusing most of the
> original text or including the updated text. we often didn't know or
> otherwise misstated our implications. every material statement made by
> any prior DNS specification or update to the specification should be
> enumerated and checked off as its then-modern meaning is incorporated.
>
> i'll offer to join a team to work on this when i eventually retire, if
> it hasn't been recently enough done at that time. so, i think, should
> other guilty parties.
>
> --
> P Vixie
>

I agree with you Paul on rewriting. I was trying to comment that even the
idea
of publishing a version of those documents with the updates as a
-00/starting point
felt thankless.

But walking through the specifications ? indeed.

tim