On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 at 17:39, Peter Thomassen
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I support draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis and draft-ietf-dnsop-must-not-sha1
> moving forward.
I also support
>
> I don't know enough about GOST to have an opinion on
> draft-ietf-dnsop-must-not-ecc-gost.
>
How widely deployed is GOST
Hello all,
This may be off-topic, but saw this mail about "domain validation"
appear in my mailbox.
It seems that the specification wants to specify a standardized way to
verify domains when needing some authority (e.g. during certificate
requests or activating a mail service for you domain
On Jan 14, 2025, at 02:57, ben=40yocto@dmarc.ietf.org wrote:
> This may be off-topic, but saw this mail about "domain validation" appear in
> my mailbox.
Not at all off-topic: draft-ietf-dnsop-domain-verification-techniques is a WG
document.
> It seems that the specification wants to speci
On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 03:20, Warren Kumari wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 3:28 AM, Loganaden Velvindron
> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 at 17:39, Peter Thomassen
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I support draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis and draft-ietf-dnsop-must-not-sha1
>> moving forward
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 3:28 AM, Loganaden Velvindron
wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 at 17:39, Peter Thomassen
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I support draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis and draft-ietf-dnsop-must-not-sha1
> moving forward.
>
> I also support
>
> I don't know enough about GOST to have an opinion on
