IETF Logo Mail Archive

[DNSOP] Re: [Ext] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7958bis

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org> Fri, 28 June 2024 16:20 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
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 5CFEBC1CAE79 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 09:20:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JQJ1sykXHv3P for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 09:20:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ppa4.dc.icann.org (ppa4.dc.icann.org [192.0.46.77]) (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 ED82AC157937 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 09:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MBX112-W2-CO-2.pexch112.icann.org (out.mail.icann.org [64.78.33.6]) by ppa4.dc.icann.org (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTPS id 45SGEuHT017558 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 09:14:56 -0700
Received: from MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org (10.226.41.128) by MBX112-W2-CO-2.pexch112.icann.org (10.226.41.130) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1258.34; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 09:20:23 -0700
Received: from MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org ([169.254.44.235]) by MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org ([169.254.44.235]) with mapi id 15.02.1258.034; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 09:20:23 -0700
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
To: James Mitchell <james.mitchell@iana.org>
Thread-Topic: [DNSOP] [Ext] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7958bis
Thread-Index: AQHayXcUU9H7MEKQ90W+SC7B+KD7LQ==
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:20:23 +0000
Message-ID: <E58B1C4D-1DB0-4123-9C91-02E7FDC6D6EB@icann.org>
References: <CADyWQ+EGh2N8tssBRskH=PVXV1e1eON4z=8E1JWPypNUyZVwLg@mail.gmail.com> <879F4E56-9939-4C57-A597-9BB113F92C0D@iana.org>
In-Reply-To: <879F4E56-9939-4C57-A597-9BB113F92C0D@iana.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.0.32.234]
x-source-routing-agent: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <5882D3B323A4664C8A47D3E543BF205D@pexch112.icann.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1039,Hydra:6.0.680,FMLib:17.12.28.16 definitions=2024-06-28_11,2024-06-28_01,2024-05-17_01
Message-ID-Hash: IJN7MQO42ETXSAII4OGJKXDKXBSAW5YB
X-Message-ID-Hash: IJN7MQO42ETXSAII4OGJKXDKXBSAW5YB
X-MailFrom: paul.hoffman@icann.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-dnsop.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [DNSOP] Re: [Ext] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7958bis
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/fOyrTZ7E-M-pnl9nVzfuxHKJb0w>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:dnsop-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dnsop-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dnsop-leave@ietf.org>

On Jun 26, 2024, at 13:31, James Mitchell <james.mitchell@iana.org> wrote:
> 
>  Please find my comments below.

Thanks for the review, James. These all seem easy to deal with. Of particular note:

>  Looking ahead to the addition of the PublicKey element, we discussed whether to publish the PublicKey element for historical TAs and whether we would remove the PublicKey for future-historical TAs. While we have not formalized plans, can we assume these are operational decisions to be made by IANA?

Absolutely.

> If so, does the draft require text to clarify that the PublicKey may be present for some KeyDigests and that the element may be removed if previously present?

We can add that wording, but it is really up to IANA at any given time how they want to handle historic trust anchors within the given XML syntax.

We still look forward to others in the WG commenting in WG Last Call. This draft affects way more than IANA.

--Paul Hoffman

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status