Terry Manderson has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: Recuse
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refe
Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please r
On 11/20/18 8:42 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
On Nov 20, 2018, at 6:09 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
§5:
o CBOR is an IETF standard and familiar to IETF participants. It is
While CBOR is standards-track, it's nowhere near standard yet. Suggest:
"...is an IETF specification..." (See BCP 9)
The CBOR WG
On Nov 20, 2018, at 6:09 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
>
> §5:
>
>> o CBOR is an IETF standard and familiar to IETF participants. It is
>
> While CBOR is standards-track, it's nowhere near standard yet. Suggest:
> "...is an IETF specification..." (See BCP 9)
The CBOR WG is actively working on moving
Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please ref
Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
Hi Alissa!
On Nov 20, 2018, at 20:18, Alissa Cooper wrote:
> I support Benjamin's first DISCUSS point. In addition to documenting the
> privacy considerations, I think it's important for this document to be crystal
> clear about who is meant to be doing the data collection -- namely, the server
Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations WG of the IETF.
Title : DNS Attrleaf Changes: Fixing Specifications with
Underscored Node Name Use
Author : Dave Croc
> On 20 Nov 2018, at 12:45 am, Mukund Sivaraman wrote:
>
> Hi Stephen, Francis
>
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 04:56:50AM -0800, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote:
>>
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>> directories.
>> This draft is a work item of the Domain Nam
Follow-up.
tldr:
- The first argument is just an issue of wording.
- Authoritative servers or provisioning scripts that do ANAME processing
should honor the target address records TTL.
- Sibling address records should be used as a default if ANAME
processing fails.
On 11/9/18 6:54 PM, Richar
On 19/11/2018 13:45, Mukund Sivaraman wrote:
Soon after this TSIG authentication bypass attack was reported, during a
review of the BIND TSIG implementation by Ray Bellis and me, we found a
couple of other issues. One of them is not a real-world issue (to do
with under-specification of what to d
12 matches
Mail list logo
