On 25. 06. 26 17:59, Joe Abley wrote:
On 25 Jun 2026, at 08:16, [email protected] wrote:
Without digging into the technical merits of OLD vs NEW, the text you
flagged reflects the intended behavior as further confirmed in Section 10:
Section 5.4 recommends logging these as
errors and continuing to wait for a signed response until the request
times out.
I don't think filling an errata is appropriate here. This errata falls
under the following case [1]:
"Changes that modify the working of a protocol to something that might
be different from the intended consensus when the document was
approved should generally be Rejected. Significant clarifications
should not be handled as errata reports and need to be discussed by
the relevant technical community."
My current take is to reject it.
That logic seems reasonable. But the change that Ondrej suggested also
seems reasonable. So we wrote some words while I was waiting for a
train. This is a short draft that updates 8945 to reflect the suggested
change.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sury-dnsop-tsig-clarify/
Simple and to the point. Ship it, if erratum cannot do it.
--
Petr Špaček
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
