> From: Vladimír Čunát <vladimir.cu...@nic.cz> > On 10/17/18 11:18 PM, fujiw...@jprs.co.jp wrote: >> 4. In my opinion, Ed25519 is best algorithm some yars later. >> If the document describes both current RECOMMENDATIONS and >> RECOMMENDATIONS some years later, we can plan. > > > I agree, but the last paragraph of 3.1 seems to express that already:
Yes. # I'm afraid that some TLD/Root operators may not support ED25519 # because it is RECOMMENDED (not MUST). >> It is expected that ED25519 will become the future RECOMMENDED default >> algorithm once there's enough support for this algorithm in the >> deployed DNSSEC validators. > Do you mean that "expected future recommendations" should be made more > visible in a separate section or something? Yes. (something) -- Kazunori Fujiwara, JPRS <fujiw...@jprs.co.jp> _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
