All I've gone back and reviewed all the emails on rfc8624-bis and it does seem like everything has been addressed during the WGLC and we have consensus on progressing this forward. I don't see any editorial changes the authors needs to address at this time.
thanks tim On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 3:23 PM Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > All > > The Working Group Last Call for these three documents is wrapping up > (though my email seemed to miss the date). > > For draft-ietf-dnsop-must-not-ecc-gost and draft-ietf-dnsop-must-not-sha1, > there were some editorial changes the authors have made, but not yet > published. Once they publish the updated versions we can move them forward. > > As for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis, I want to review the comments once > again. There was a request for more discussion on Section 2, but there > does not feel to be enough consensus to change what is current. > > thanks > tim > > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2025 at 9:02 PM Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> All >> >> Welcome back from holidays, those who have returned. >> Discussions with the working group and authors and we feel these >> documents are ready to move forward. The two deprecation documents are >> short. >> The focus of 8624-bis is to move the canonical list of DNSSEC algorithms >> to >> an IANA registry. >> >> This starts a Working Group Last Call for these three documents: >> >> "DNSSEC Cryptographic Algorithm Recommendation Update Process" >> "Remove SHA-1 from active use within DNSSEC" >> "Remove deprecated GOST algorithms from active use within DNSSEC" >> >> >> Current versions of the draft is available here: >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-must-not-ecc-gost/ >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-must-not-sha1/ >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis/ >> >> >> The Current Intended Status of this document are: >> >> draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis - Informational >> draft-ietf-dnsop-must-not-sha1 - Proposed Standard >> draft-ietf-dnsop-must-not-ecc-gost - Proposed Standard >> >> >> Please review the drafts and offer relevant comments. >> >> For WGLC, we need positive support and constructive comments; lack of >> objection is not enough. >> So if you think any of these drafts should be published as an RFC, please >> say so. >> >> If you feel *any* of these documents are *not* ready for publication, >> please speak out with your reasons. >> You are welcome to support or reject any or all of these documents >> >> This starts a two week Working Group Last Call process, and ends on: >> >> thanks >> >> >> tim >> >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-le...@ietf.org
