Re: [DNSOP] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dnsop-child-syncronization-02.txt> (Child To Parent Synchronization in DNS) to Proposed Standard

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Mon, 11 August 2014 00:50 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3592E1A00B7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 17:50:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.568
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.568 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] autolearn=ham
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 AtVhEoDTRSrS for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 17:50:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 554CF1A007D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 17:50:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1XGdoh-00088U-Pm; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:50:28 +0000
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 08:50:23 +0800
Message-ID: <m2zjfbx31s.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dnsop-child-syncronization-02.txt> (Child To Parent Synchronization in DNS) to Proposed Standard
In-Reply-To: <53E7D16B.3020301@bogus.com>
References: <20140808151621.1148.70609.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <53E7D16B.3020301@bogus.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Yfrjak0A_6feQfjuWC3Zb5j94Lg
Cc: IETF Disgust <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:50:31 -0000

as the threat models seem similar why do we need two separate
mechanisms, one for NS 
   draft-ietf-dnsop-child-syncronization-02.txt
and one for DS
   draft-ietf-dnsop-delegation-trust-maintainance-14.txt

randy