The Meeting has concluded, and there has been sufficient positive consensus
to adopt this draft into DNSOP..
Authors, you are free to upload the newer draft name.
Thanks to all for their comments and offers to review. We will hold each
and every one of you to these offers.
Tim
On Sun, Mar 10, 2
Assuming that the draft is adopted, I am willing to work on it and
contribute new text.
Dick
On Sun, 10 Mar 2019 at 14:31, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> The chairs feel the document has been updated to address
> several issues raised from the last meeting, including
> some
I support adoption too and have (the version in this draft) of ZONEMD
provisioned already in the net-dns.org. zone.
Dick Franks worked on a ZONEMD verifier for Net::DNS during the
Hackathon last Saturday/Sunday (remotely).
On 10-03-19 15:31, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> The chairs feel the document ha
On Sun, 10 Mar 2019 at 15:31, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> This starts a Call for Adoption for draft-wessels-dns-zone-digest
>
I believe DNSOP should adopt this draft.
> Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.
>
I am willing to review and contribute text.
>
>
I support adoption and note that since the draft already has an early code
point allocation there really isn’t any strong argument for not adopting it
anymore. The code point is lost, so we might as well make it as good as
possible :)
Sent from mobile device
> On Mar 10, 2019, at 15:31, Tim Wi
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 7:31 AM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> The chairs feel the document has been updated to address
> several issues raised from the last meeting, including
> some implementations.
>
> If there is pushback during this call for adoption, we can
> take the topic up in Prague.
>
> This
Hi Tim,
On Mar 10, 2019, at 15:31, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by
> DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.
I support adoption of this draft by dnsop.
> Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute
Support adoption. This is a mechanism which I think is useful and
which permits out-of-dns provisioning mechanisms to have high trust in
the specific state of a zone being fetched. It is complementary to
DNSSEC and not antagonistic.
-George
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 3:31 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
>
I support adoption. I can see some good use cases for this and I have
previously worked on a proprietary implementation achieving similar goals
to those that are mentioned in the draft.
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 3:32 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> The chairs feel the document has been updated to addre
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 3:32 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> The chairs feel the document has been updated to address
> several issues raised from the last meeting, including
> some implementations.
>
> If there is pushback during this call for adoption, we can
> take the topic up in Prague.
>
> This
Am 10.03.19 um 15:31 schrieb Tim Wicinski:
> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by
> DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.
Hello,
The document itself is written clearly.
As a user of the mentioned LDNS implementation I find it useful
The chairs feel the document has been updated to address
several issues raised from the last meeting, including
some implementations.
If there is pushback during this call for adoption, we can
take the topic up in Prague.
This starts a Call for Adoption for draft-wessels-dns-zone-digest
The draf
12 matches
Mail list logo
