On 4/14/2022 5:09 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
On Feb 1, 2022, at 12:35 PM, Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote:
We were reviewing the Working Group Last Call for this, and we received no
comments. We know there was interest in at least moving this forward, but even
Warren concurred we can't send this to the IESG unless there are folks saying
they feel it is ready to be published.
That was a few months ago. There were only two responses, one negative, one blandly
positive ("seems reasonable").
Hi Paul -
Needs work is not a negative, it's a "not yet ready". I don't have a
problem with the publication of such a document, and I agree with Russ
that the changes between this and RFC5933 are reasonable - but RFC5933
isn't a model of clarity itself and shouldn't be used as justification
to publish this document. So "needs work" not "ready for publication"
Mike
Can the chairs please say what they expect to do with this draft? I ask because
it is directly relevant to draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-bcp, where the draft's
predecessor is mentioned.
--Paul Hoffman
_______________________________________________
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
