Re: [DNSOP] Passive DNS - Common Output Format (draft-dulaunoy-kaplan-passive-dns-cof-01)

ollection and responses? Cheers, > > ... > > > > > _______ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > -- Sebastian Castro Technical Research Manager .nz Registry Service

Re: [DNSOP] WGLC: draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-dps-framework-04.txt

On 06/14/2011 05:22 AM, Stephen Morris wrote: I've read this document (and previous versions), I have no further comments and support its publication as Informational -- Sebastian Castro DNS Specialist .nz Registry Services (New Zealand Domain Name Registry Limited) desk: +64 4 495 2337 m

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-dps-framework-01.txt

ation and Installation" subsection. Is there any reason behind such change? Kind Regards > > regards, > > -- Fredrik > > -- Sebastian Castro DNS Specialist .nz Registry Services (New Zealand Domain Name Registry Limited) desk: +64 4 495 2337 mobile: +64 21 400535

[DNSOP] rfc4641bis-02 and signature validity period

more easy? In my particular opinion, that solution is very handy to reduce the access to the KSK. Kind Regards [1] http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-55/presentations/lamb-dnssec.pdf [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-dps-framework/ -- Sebastian Castro DNS Specialist

Re: [DNSOP] Priming query transport selection

ntirely to the sysadmin, and not restricted to an arbitrary lower value > by their software. > > kind regards, > > Ray > > -- > Ray Bellis, MA(Oxon) MIET > Senior Researcher in Advanced Projects, Nominet > e: r...@nominet.org.uk, t: +44 1865 332211 > Cheers Sebastian Castro NZRS > > ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Re: [DNSOP] Priming query transport selection

ray.bel...@nominet.org.uk wrote: > >> EDNS0 RFC restricts EDNS0 to 4096 bytes, number of implementations >> will not send more even if client ask for it. Firewalls will >> enforce this. > > RFC 2671 enforces no such limit - the strict limit is 65535, and §4.5.5 > has a hint that 4K might be a re

Re: [DNSOP] TCP/UDP performances

Daniel Migault wrote: > Hi, Hi, > We are looking for measurements on the following points : >- How TCP affects DNS servers performances compared to UDP? >- Proportion of clients that switch to TCP? The proportion of clients switching to TCP depends on what are the clients asking and the

Re: [DNSOP] new draft about idn tld variants implementation

version is a summary of the potential issues with DNAMEs only. Also there are some structure and wording issues. For example, the abstract and the introduction are the same. Probably I will continue the discussion of this document to provide a more fine grained criticism. cheers Sebastian Castro > > Best regards, > > Andrew > ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Re: [DNSOP] AS112 for TLDs

On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 01:51:54PM -0400, Edward Lewis wrote: > At 10:35 -0700 4/1/08, Sebastian Castro Avila wrote: > > >Sorry for the late response. About this matter, using the data collected > >at the root server instances participating in DITL 2007, we found 24.73% > &g

Re: [DNSOP] AS112 for TLDs

20.29% localhost8.92% domain 3.15% invalid 2.43% lan 2.06% belkin 1.76% home 1.30% localdomain 1.29% wpad 0.74% txt 0.74% You may want to check the presentation including this numbers

Re: [DNSOP] WGLC for

ries and check the Yellow Area. Regards -- Akira Kato ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop Sebastian Castro NIC Chile / CAIDA ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.o