I also support adoption of this draft - it is attempting to address a genuine impediment to deploying DNSSEC and I think this group is the right place to work on it.
As mentioned at the mic in Montreal, I’d like to see it additionally reflect how the proposals here feed into the process for moving vendors after deployment. Sara. > On 18 Jul 2018, at 11:13, Yoshiro YONEYA <yoshiro.yon...@jprs.co.jp> wrote: > > I support this draft to be WG I-D. > > -- > Yoshiro YONEYA <yoshiro.yon...@jprs.co.jp> > > On Fri, 6 Jul 2018 20:26:59 -0400 Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> We've had some interest in moving this document forward, and the chairs >> wanted to kick off this Call for Adoption before Montreal so if there >> are concerns there will be some meeting time to address. >> >> This document is label as: Informational. The document is attempting >> to document operational deployment models on deploying DNSSEC signed >> zones across multiple platforms. >> >> This starts a Call for Adoption for: draft-huque-dnsop-multi-provider-dnssec >> >> The draft is available here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-huque-dnsop-multi-provider-dnssec/ >> >> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for >> adoption by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view. >> The authors will be at the next meeting to address questions or concerns. >> >> Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc. >> >> This call for adoption ends: 20 July 2018 >> >> Thanks, >> Tim > > _______________________________________________ > 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
