IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Fwd: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Thu, 14 April 2022 21:24 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 4BB953A1948; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 14:24:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 YNnQhmt9qK67; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 14:23:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.85]) (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 2C9FC3A193F; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 14:23:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4KfXWv3pYJzFK7; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 23:23:55 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1649971435; bh=8OVmwbuMp/YJ5gsaJijkbyBAayNs+8I6VNaP4x2Wa3U=; h=From:Subject:Date:References:Cc:In-Reply-To:To; b=PKPu09R/Z/8SWNZluRtzqj6XcFNy8HVq8HIfWbovbQoE/zb+TF32S9uitVVpUaTcb zZUvotUXT/4yxysuyJSTc80AOKTN2z1H7G2S++uCAt3/RGe7hR6oQ6xXzDwJpmMEHL PemkwJKAJ48MWQhL756aprzi/wwaLSrnIKjHFAGo=
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 0OFcgOZmtdNy; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 23:23:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [193.110.157.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 23:23:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (24-246-53-111.cable.teksavvy.com [24.246.53.111]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4A61A2E274E; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 17:23:53 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2022 17:23:49 -0400
Message-Id: <71364CAF-ABC4-47D8-A330-9305F53C656F@nohats.ca>
References: <D0737445-5AF5-4079-9B8B-71E6890C5C29@icann.org>
Cc: dnsop-chairs <dnsop-chairs@ietf.org>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <D0737445-5AF5-4079-9B8B-71E6890C5C29@icann.org>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (19E241)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/TVrpO5iTQ8mEXMPgjyJMXtsa5RE>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Fwd: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-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: Thu, 14 Apr 2022 21:24:03 -0000

On Apr 14, 2022, at 17:09, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org> wrote:

(Speaking with nohats on)

> 
> On Feb 1, 2022, at 12:35 PM, Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>> We were reviewing the Working Group Last Call for this, and we received no comments.  We know there was interest in at least moving this forward, but even Warren concurred we can't send this to the IESG unless there are folks saying they feel it is ready to be published.
> 
> That was a few months ago. There were only two responses, one negative, one blandly positive ("seems reasonable"). 

Not sure if I replied at the time, but I think it should proceed - either as dnsop or ISE document. There is a requirement, whether we like it or not. 

> Can the chairs please say what they expect to do with this draft? I ask because it is directly relevant to draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-bcp, where the draft's predecessor is mentioned.

I predecessor should be marked dead regardless and not be in the dnssec-bcp document other than to strongly say not to use it. But that is somewhat separate from this document.

Paul

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email