My point was thatexample.com. IN DS49172 13 130 e2c8c32fb3c40586e0dabc367bfde4368b8dff52a7ffc60f619c720ec7767320 example.com. IN DS49172 13 2 e2c8c32fb3c40586e0dabc367bfde4368b8dff52a7ffc60f619c720ec7767320
is more equivalent (i.e. the change from the first to the second looks safer and more straightforward) than
example.com. IN DS49172 13 7 02e2c8c32fb3c40586e0dabc367bfde4368b8dff52a7ffc60f619c720ec7767320 example.com. IN DS49172 13 2 e2c8c32fb3c40586e0dabc367bfde4368b8dff52a7ffc60f619c720ec7767320
/Libor Dne 18. 07. 24 v 10:27 Mark Andrews napsal(a):
It would look like a regular DS. The only difference would be that the first byte of the digest would contain the sub type. This is just internal structure of the digest.
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-le...@ietf.org
