On 4/8/14, 7:38 AM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 4.4.2014 00:42, Paul Hoffman wrote:
On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Andrew Sullivan
wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 05:39:58PM -0400, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
>
>> operated on Internet networks. This will include root zone
>> name servers, TLD name ser
On 8 Apr 2014, at 10:27, Petr Spacek wrote:
> I would rather see RFC 4025, RFC 4255, draft-wouters-dane-openpgp and
> draft-wouters-dane-openpgpkey-usage to be practically implemented and widely
> used sooner than later.
I would like to see those things too. But they're a bit useless without
On 8.4.2014 16:10, Joe Abley wrote:
On 8 Apr 2014, at 9:54, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 8.4.2014 15:20, Edward Lewis wrote:
From the linked message:
Let me quote very first part of the message to put it into context:
People start to disagree when it comes to questions like "Is it feasible to
re
On 8 Apr 2014, at 9:54, Petr Spacek wrote:
> On 8.4.2014 15:20, Edward Lewis wrote:
>> From the linked message:
>
> Let me quote very first part of the message to put it into context:
> People start to disagree when it comes to questions like "Is it
> feasible to
> rely
On 8.4.2014 15:20, Edward Lewis wrote:
From the linked message:
Let me quote very first part of the message to put it into context:
People start to disagree when it comes to questions like "Is it feasible to
rely on a local validating resolver in the near future? How can applications
detect t
Hello everybody,
-Original Message-
From: DNSOP [mailto:dnsop-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Suzanne Woolf
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 2:00 AM
To: DNSOP WG
Cc:
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft new charter
Paul (and Andrew),
On Apr 3, 2014, at 6:42 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On Apr 3, 2
From the linked message:
1) DNS-Architecturally speaking, this statement is incorrect:
*Local validating resolver is strongly recommended.*
What is needed is:
*Local validator is strongly recommended.*
Well, this is better:
*Local validator is required.*
Or "local validation is required in
On 4.4.2014 00:42, Paul Hoffman wrote:
On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 05:39:58PM -0400, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
>
>> operated on Internet networks. This will include root zone
>> name servers, TLD name servers, name servers for other DNS
>> zone
Hi Ed,
At 09:40 07-04-2014, Edward Lewis wrote:
This charter seems to fly in the fase of the
traditional IETF charter style, wherein a WG was
deemed to have a set end point. Develop
guidelines, publish documents and serve as a
clearinghouse are terms that engender more
activity but don
sent from Google nexus 4
kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 4 Apr 2014 13:53, "Antoin Verschuren" wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> op 04-04-14 10:59, Stephane Bortzmeyer schreef:
>
> > same) and I dislike even more "DNS-like names", which seems to
> > imply there are
On 4/7/14, 9:40 AM, Edward Lewis wrote:
> This charter seems to fly in the fase of the traditional IETF charter
> style, wherein a WG was deemed to have a set end point.
that's not entirely uncommon in ops charters. for better or worse
operations (of dns, ipv6, multicast, global routing etc) does
This charter seems to fly in the fase of the traditional IETF charter style,
wherein a WG was deemed to have a set end point. “Develop guidelines”,
“publish documents” and “serve as a clearinghouse” are terms that engender more
activity but don’t indicate progress. (A long time ago, in a gover
On 4/6/14, 4:25 PM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> (catching up, and I'll jump into the middle of things)
>
> On 4/4/14, 4:59 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 05:39:58PM -0400,
>> Suzanne Woolf wrote
>> a message of 69 lines which said:
>>
>>> 4. Publish documents on extension
(catching up, and I'll jump into the middle of things)
On 4/4/14, 4:59 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 05:39:58PM -0400,
Suzanne Woolf wrote
a message of 69 lines which said:
4. Publish documents on extensions or protocol maintenance to the DNS
Protocol, with a
On Apr 4, 2014, at 9:09, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Apr 4, 2014, at 8:53 AM, Antoin Verschuren
> wrote:
>> I don't considder these other names with dots in them inferior, but
>> they are simply not domain names.
>
> Whether you are right or not, I think Stephane's interpretation is
> technically c
On Apr 3, 2014, at 17:39, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
> 6. Publish documents that attempt to better define the overlapping
> area among the public DNS root, DNS-like names as used in local or
> restricted
> naming scopes, and the 'special names' registry that IETF
> manages, and how they will in
On Apr 4, 2014, at 8:53 AM, Antoin Verschuren wrote:
> I don't considder these other names with dots in them inferior, but
> they are simply not domain names.
Whether you are right or not, I think Stephane's interpretation is technically
correct. I don't mean that it _is_, I just mean that I t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
op 04-04-14 10:59, Stephane Bortzmeyer schreef:
> same) and I dislike even more "DNS-like names", which seems to
> imply there are inferior names. www.foobar.local is a domain name,
> even if it is not resolved through the DNS.
I tend to disagree to
On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 05:39:58PM -0400,
Suzanne Woolf wrote
a message of 69 lines which said:
> 4. Publish documents on extensions or protocol maintenance to the DNS
>Protocol, with a focus on the operational impacts of
>such changes. Act as clearinghouse for discussion or provide ad
On Apr 3, 2014, at 4:00 PM, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
> Understood that wordsmithing is needed, and getting the wording right is an
> important detail, but I think we're even more interested in whether the item
> should be there at all: should DNSOP, in appropriate collaboration with all
> relevant
Paul (and Andrew),
On Apr 3, 2014, at 6:42 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>
>> Given that "liaison" is a term of art around the IETF, perhaps the
>> latter sentence needs to be phrased another way? I'm not sure exactly
>> what you have in mind, or
On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 05:39:58PM -0400, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
>
>> operated on Internet networks. This will include root zone
>> name servers, TLD name servers, name servers for other DNS
>> zones, iterative DNS resolvers, and recursive
On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 05:39:58PM -0400, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
>operated on Internet networks. This will include root zone
>name servers, TLD name servers, name servers for other DNS
>zones, iterative DNS resolvers, and recursive DNS resolvers.
Is there a reason to call out these part
Colleagues,
Here is draft text for the new charter we've been talking about for DNSOP.
When we have something the WG is comfortable with, we get to ask our AD to take
it to the IESG, so please review and comment.
(If you want to comment off-list, please send to dnsop-cha...@tools.ietf.org,
cc'
24 matches
Mail list logo
