On Thu, 18 Jun 2020, Paul Hoffman wrote:
On Jun 18, 2020, at 7:59 AM, Dmitry Belyavsky <beld...@gmail.com> wrote:
The 2nd registry
Delegation Signer (DS) Resource Record (RR) Type Digest Algorithms
(https://www.iana.org/assignments/ds-rr-types/ds-rr-types.xhtml#ds-rr-types-1
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/ds-rr-types/ds-rr-types.xhtml#ds-rr-types-1>)
has the "Standards Action" update policy
I had forgotten that the DS registry is "standards action". This document shows
why that was a bad idea.
It might be better, and faster, for this WG to adopt a one-paragraph draft that makes the
DS registry "RFC required", like the other DNSSEC-related registries.
I agree.
However, whether it is faster for the document, I don't know. The ISE
stream is currently very slow moving. Perhaps these documents could
flow faster than the two other ISE stream ones I am I'm tracking.
I'm fine with the RFCs being standard track.
Paul
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
