Re: [DNSOP] [IANA #1362913] expert review for draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping (dns-parameters)

[Paul Wouters <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, 20 Apr 2024, Peter Thomassen wrote:

> The authors certainly don't insist, but we'd need to pick a suitable 
> replacement for the "_signal" label.
>
> John proposed "_dnssec-signal" elsewhere in this thread.
>
> The authors would like to note that adding "_dnssec-" eats up 8 more bytes, 
> increasing chances that bootstrapping will fail due to the 
> _dsboot.<domain-name>._dnssec-signal.<nsname> length limitation. Other than 
> this (unnecessary?) use case narrowing, this choice seems fine.
>
> That said, does this choice address your concerns?

It would, but I would also be okay if it is just _dnssec.

> The main question then is to get implementations updated. I'm thus copying a 
> few implementers so they can comment w.r.t. making this change in their 
> implementation. I suppose that barring their objections, it's fine to go 
> ahead?

I feel less sympathy there because I brought this up a long time ago :)
But also, implementations are all young and new and I think it is still
pretty easy to change.

Paul