Re: (short version) Re: Last Call: <draft-faltstrom-uri-10.txt> (The Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) DNS Resource Record) to Proposed Standard

[Sam Hartman <[e-mail]>]

>>>>> "John" == John C Klensin <[e-mail]> writes:

    John> If anything, the text now says too much because introductory
    John> statements like "The basic mechanism for successful use of URI
    John> works..." strongly imply that use of, and reliance on, DNSSEC
    John> is the only way to accomplish successful (and safe) use.  The
    John> current Security Considerations section could be equated to an
    John> Applicability Statement that said "unless DNSSEC is used, and
    John> used as specified in this document, use of the URI RR is NOT
    John> RECOMMENDED".  I don't think that is either intended or
    John> justified.

I do think an applicability statement that says this RR is inappropriate
for situations where authentication of the accessed resource is desired
and DNSSec is not used.  I think that's justified and hoped something
like that was intended by section 7.
I agree that there are uses where you don't care about the
authentication of the accessed resource where DNSSec is not required.