IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-idnabis-rationale-13.txt

John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com> Tue, 06 October 2009 13:24 UTC

Return-Path: <klensin@jck.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B1233A6961; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:24:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.56
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.56 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.039, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q+UrQcfOd5vs; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:24:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DF153A67AE; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:24:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1MvA3A-0000Ex-IQ; Tue, 06 Oct 2009 09:25:56 -0400
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 09:25:55 -0400
From: John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com>
To: Vint Cerf <vint@google.com>, Charlie Kaufman <charliek@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <9FDFFFAC141D4DF0C4522BD0@PST.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <2FA54714-6D7F-46E3-A2CA-BC9D44CBC29B@google.com>
References: <D80EDFF2AD83E648BD1164257B9B091208282265@TK5EX14MBXC115.redmond.corp.micr osoft.com> <p06240883c6f00ff718bf@[10.20.30.163]> <D80EDFF2AD83E648BD1164257B9B091208283635@TK5EX14MBXC115.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <17823AE7FE62B8814BE101BF@PST.JCK.COM> <D80EDFF2AD83E648BD1164257B9B0912082837C2@TK5EX14MBXC115.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <2FA54714-6D7F-46E3-A2CA-BC9D44CBC29B@google.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Cc: Paul Hoffman <phoffman@imc.org>, idna-update@alvestrand.no, iesg@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-idnabis-rationale-13.txt
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 13:24:30 -0000

--On Tuesday, October 06, 2009 07:12 -0400 Vint Cerf
<vint@google.com> wrote:

> if we mention DNSSEC at all (and perhaps it is not necessary
> since DNSSEC operates at the DNS level), we might simply say
> that IDNA is compatible with DNSSEC since signed DNS entries
> that reference IDNA A-labels are fully compatible with DNSSEC.
> It is a sort of gratuitous statement but perhaps it was
> requested because DNSSEC was "new" and the person requesting
> the reference wanted to be clear that IDNA didn't invalid the
> use of DNSSEC?

Or, if my memory is correct, the IDNA didn't require any special
handling in DNSSEC.

   john

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email