On 17 March 2015 at 10:49, David Conrad <d...@virtualized.org> wrote: >> On 17 March 2015 at 10:36, David Cake <d...@difference.com.au> wrote: >> >> I'm generally in favour of this proposal. > > +1
I also support this draft. CA issuance for .onion post-October is dependent on this draft, and external reliance on an RFC (or lack of RFC) by some date is not particularly uncommon. It's not a reason to rush a draft through of course, but it is why we are hoping people can consider the technical merits of the draft and raise substantive (and editorial) concerns. To the discussion of aborting lookup, returning NXDOMAIN locally, etc - everyone understands that this is not guaranteed to occur - but we can hope it will, and can point people to this document as encouragement. And even if no software conforms to these guidelines, having .onion in the special use registry is still appropriate and useful. -tom _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
