On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 11:45 AM Joe Abley <jab...@strandkip.nl> wrote:
> Hi Tim, > > Doesn't that text presuppose (a) that the current naming scheme is > invariant and (b) the root-servers.net zone will one day be signed? > > I suggest phrasing that recognises current reality is probably better than > text that speculates about the future, especially when it comes to things > that the IETF may not have the final say on. > > > Joe > Oh that's a very good point, and does make that assumption. "will be valuable if root-servers.net is DNSSEC signed" does not make that assumption. tim > On 17 Jun 2024, at 17:40, Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Paul is correct on this - we would like a few more comments on the > clarification changes to RFC8109-bis. > Also, Willem offered some suggested text to the last paragraph of 3.3 > relating to root-servers.net : > > "DNSSEC validation of the priming query is valuable when > root-servers.net zone will be DNSSEC signed and resolvers revalidate the > root server addresses, by following up with direct A and AAAA queries for > the names of the root NS RRset" > > I would only offer up some slight edit: > > DNSSEC validation of the priming query will be valuable when the > root-servers.net zone is DNSSEC signed. > > "will be valuable when" sounds clearer than "is valuable when" but I will > leave that as a suggestion. > > Some final considerations please > > tim > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 3:53 PM Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@icann.org> > wrote: > >> One more nudge on this, before the deadline tomorrow. >> >> --Paul Hoffman >> >> >> On Jun 5, 2024, at 09:28, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@icann.org> wrote: >> > >> > Tim jumped the gun by about an hour: we just submitted the -05. It >> incorporates the suggested text from below; you can see the diff at: >> > >> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis-05 >> > >> > FWIW, this new text is somewhat based on the findings from NLnetLabs >> and SIDN on a project supported by ICANN. You can see the report, and an >> earlier report on a related topic, at: >> > >> https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/octo-commissioned-documents-2020-11-05-en >> > >> > Please let us know if you have any issues with the changed text in the >> new version. >> > >> > --Paul Hoffman >> > >> > >> > On Jun 5, 2024, at 08:25, Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> All >> >> >> >> The chairs are requesting some final comments on >> draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis. As you might recall, this document has already >> been through WGLC and had consensus to advance, but our AD reviewed it and >> raised some additional questions. (Warren Kumari, “AD Review of >> draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis,” email to the list on 31 January.) >> >> _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-le...@ietf.org > >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-le...@ietf.org
