Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for: draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel

[Job Snijders <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 at 14:01, Petr Špaček <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 6.4.2018 13:18, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> > On 5 Apr 2018, at 18:35, tjw ietf wrote:
> >
> >> After walking through the 168 emails on this draft in the inbox, I feel
> >> we're ready to take this to WGLC.
> >>
> >> (We are aware of the two points raised my Job and Paul)
> >
> > Especially given that an implementation is in fact available (in Knot),
> > why not take this opportunity to start demanding Implementation Status
> > sections for those drafts where that requirement makes sense? Because it
> > certainly makes sense here!
>
> Please note that we did not update Knot Resolver to comply with latest
> version of the draft *yet*. This is likely to happen over next couple
> weeks, not sooner. We have hands full with other tasks at the moment.
>
> Of course patches to
>
> https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/knot/knot-resolver/blob/master/modules/ta_sentinel/ta_sentinel.lua
> are more than welcome!
>
>
> Speaking of Joes comment, it makes sense to me. AFAIK other resolvers
> are going to implement this anyway so there is no point in rushing the
> RFC out and setting it in stone before it gets implemented at least twice.



My grandmother used to tell me you can’t build a stable chair with just two
legs. Three is the minimum. Or perhaps four:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:BrokenChair.jpg

Kind regards,

Job

>