Looks good to me.
On 11/27/2017 03:54 AM, Mike West wrote:
> Post-{IETF,Thanksgiving} ping. Feedback (or further +1's!) would be
> appreciated. :)
>
> -mike
>
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 1:01 AM, Richard Barnes <r...@ipv.sx
> <mailto:r...@ipv.sx>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 5:05 AM, Ted Lemon <mel...@fugue.com
> <mailto:mel...@fugue.com>> wrote:
>
> On Nov 15, 2017, at 10:51 PM, Mike West <mk...@google.com
> <mailto:mk...@google.com>> wrote:
>> Skimming through the recording of Monday's meeting
>>
>> <https://play.conf.meetecho.com/Playout/?session=IETF100-DNSOP-20171113-0930>
>> (starting
>> at around 53:56), it sounds to me as though there's at least
>> loose agreement that signing a response for `localhost` is
>> not what we'd like to recommend: all the folks who commented
>> explicitly took that position for similar reasons. The
>> current text
>> in
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-let-localhost-be-localhost-01#section-4.2
>>
>> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-let-localhost-be-localhost-01#section-4.2>
>> reflects
>> this position, and IMO it's what we should run with.
>
> Yes, the current text appears to me to be correct.
>
>
> +1
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org <mailto:DNSOP@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
