[TLS] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-tls-dnssec-chain-extension-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tls-dnssec-chain-extension-06: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-dnssec-chain-extension/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think this is a useful document and I will ballot Yes once my small issues are resolved:

1) In 3.4:

   The first RRset in the chain MUST contain the TLSA record set being
   presented.  However, if the owner name of the TLSA record set is an
   alias (CNAME or DNAME), then it MUST be preceded by the chain of
   alias records needed to resolve it.  DNAME chains should omit

SHOULD? What are the implications if this is not followed?

   unsigned CNAME records that may have been synthesized in the response
   from a DNS resolver.

2) TLS 1.3 needs to be a normative reference, but it is not even listed in References.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The first mention of NSEC3 need a normative reference.