Document Action: 'Automating DNSSEC Delegation Trust Maintenance' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-dnsop-delegation-trust-maintainance-14.txt)

The IESG <> Mon, 16 June 2014 19:22 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D22B1A011C; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 12:22:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1UDV3EDDNokm; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 12:21:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7FFD1A0198; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 12:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: The IESG <>
To: IETF-Announce <>
Subject: Document Action: 'Automating DNSSEC Delegation Trust Maintenance' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-dnsop-delegation-trust-maintainance-14.txt)
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 5.5.0.p2
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 12:21:54 -0700
Cc: dnsop mailing list <>, dnsop chair <>, RFC Editor <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
List-Id: "IETF announcement list. No discussions." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:22:00 -0000

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Automating DNSSEC Delegation Trust Maintenance'
  (draft-ietf-dnsop-delegation-trust-maintainance-14.txt) as
Informational RFC

This document is the product of the Domain Name System Operations Working

The IESG contact persons are Joel Jaeggli and Benoit Claise.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:

Technical Summary

This document describes a method to allow DNS operators to more
easily update DNSSEC Key Signing Keys using the DNS as communication
channel.  The technique described is aimed at delegations in which it
is currently hard to move information from the child to parent.

Working Group Summary

During the cycle of this document, there was much discussion on this
method not being the only method to update this information. There 
was debate that the WG should wait to see what the Registrars will do
 in communicating with gTLDs.  There was rough consensus within the
 group, but also from the chairs, that each method can be described 
and documented in a RFC, if we felt the method would be deployed. 

There were many iterations during WGLC, but mostly surrounding the
wording, An additional Appendix section was added. 

Document Quality

The Document Shepherd did a thorough editorial and technical review 
of the document, and resolved any issues brought up during WGLC

The Document Shepherd does not have any concerns about the depth 
or breath of the reviews.  They were detailed and far ranging.


Tim Wicinski is the Document Shepherd and Joel Jaeggli is the Responsible 
Area Director.