IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] WGLC on draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-signal-05

Miek Gieben <miek@miek.nl> Thu, 29 March 2012 08:43 UTC

Return-Path: <dnsext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F55E21F891E; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1333010597; bh=SUNzLnLe0HapywZA6S3Bz00i8/SqDJNyAAH6ck6qILY=; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To: Subject:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help: List-Subscribe:Content-Type:Sender; b=CML/+k9Wr24KuSZ0HmEZzujM+C1zkG+m6KeLIfhEM3EKtM/v1NcgLzS1IkDNDENXt /NfxFX5y1dHbnRBU91JFB4jphWVHYZl32IcHEeCQ7Da/GOEeRjnvCzeBEtc4ZcuC7I xiusuCRdSAxwJD5n5Qp79/pfRQmylonfgXMK/LT0=
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C42A821F891E for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:43:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.312
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.312 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.288, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0+iNaH-wBOuN for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:43:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elektron.atoom.net (cl-201.ede-01.nl.sixxs.net [IPv6:2001:7b8:2ff:c8::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2B621F88D8 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:43:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by elektron.atoom.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AB24E3FECD; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 10:43:13 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 10:43:13 +0200
From: Miek Gieben <miek@miek.nl>
To: dnsext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20120329084313.GC10653@miek.nl>
Mail-Followup-To: dnsext@ietf.org
References: <201203271402.QAA03645@TR-Sys.de> <2E875509-4B39-4876-806D-E8FE49F83B9E@gmail.com> <a06240800cb98e84f6bb3@[192.168.130.74]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <a06240800cb98e84f6bb3@[192.168.130.74]>
User-Agent: Vim/Mutt/Linux
X-Home: http://www.miek.nl
Subject: Re: [dnsext] WGLC on draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-signal-05
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2727130987625932493=="
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org

[ Quoting <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz> in "Re: [dnsext] WGLC on draft-ietf-dns..." ]
> These comments aren't meant to stop the current document processing
> bureaucracy from proceeding but offered as food for thought.  It it
> foreseeable that in 10-15 years we will have lots of things change in
> the DNS.  We know that we lack any version management capability (the
> RFC that defined SHA256 for DS hashes mentions this).  Although it
> will be an eon before we have one, we have to start somewhere.  And
> maybe the current document, such as it is, is the first step.  But in
> talking to people here this week, we could expand the idea.

I, for one, like this. Another IANA registry is one step too far I guess, but
re-using RFC numbers like this seems like an elegant solution.

Regards,
Miek Gieben

_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email