Re: [dnsext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-signal-03.txt

Miek Gieben <miek@miek.nl> Wed, 04 January 2012 07:56 UTC

Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 08:56:43 +0100
From: Miek Gieben <miek@miek.nl>
To: dnsext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20120104075643.GB27592@miek.nl>
Mail-Followup-To: dnsext@ietf.org
References: <20120103202228.15067.34860.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <EAE05D42-2A2D-427A-834B-AB3024085677@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <EAE05D42-2A2D-427A-834B-AB3024085677@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Vim/Mutt/Linux
Subject: Re: [dnsext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-signal-03.txt
Precedence: list
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1826163216690903230=="
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org

[ Quoting <scottr.nist@gmail.com> at 15:35 on Jan  3 in "Re: [dnsext] I-D Act..." ]
> This is basically a keep alive version, although there is one major change.
>
> The option for listing the DS hashes has been removed since it doesn't add
> much.  If people think it is necessary it can be made a second EDNS option
> with a new code (both can be in the draft).

I think that is OK. 

But something else that pops up: how about signaling new hash algorithms
for nsec3 records? Right now, rolling the hash algorithm in nsec3 is next
to impossible (prolly the only way to do it is rolling the algorithms codes
again).

It that something to add to the draft?


 grtz,

-- 
    Miek

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

Attachment: signature.asc

[dnsext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-alg… internet-drafts
Re: [dnsext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec… Scott Rose
Re: [dnsext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec… Miek Gieben

Re: [dnsext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-signal-03.txt

Attachment: signature.asc