On 1/29/2021 10:22 AM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
All
After a quick check with the other chairs, we're ready to move this
draft forward.
This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-ttl
Current versions of the draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-ttl/
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-ttl/>
The Current Intended Status of this document is: Proposed Standard
as it will update 4034, 4035, and 5155.
Please review the draft and offer relevant comments.
If this does not seem appropriate please speak out.
If someone feels the document is *not* ready for publication, please
speak out with your reasons.
This starts a two week Working Group Last Call process, and ends on:
12 February 2021
thanks
tim
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Hi Tim et al -
Sorry - I completely missed this document earlier.
I can't support this as Standards track even though it purports to
update standards as it doesn't actually specify an implementable
protocol. Basically, this is dependent upon humans doing the right
thing, rather than specifying behavior of the protocol.
For each of these, I'd recommend specifying what a client does in each
of the cases, rather than weasel wording the SHOULD with respect to the
zone contents to turn this into an implementable protocol.
E.g. for each of these clauses add something similar to "The client
SHOULD/MUST reduce the effective TTL for the received NSEC RR to the
lesser of the TTL of the current SOA record, the TTL of the SOA, and
the TTL of the NSEC RR record and MUST discard the NSEC RR when that
effective TTL expires."
So - not ready for last call.
Mike
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
