On Sat, 20 Apr 2024, Peter Thomassen wrote:
The authors certainly don't insist, but we'd need to pick a suitable
replacement for the "_signal" label.
John proposed "_dnssec-signal" elsewhere in this thread.
The authors would like to note that adding "_dnssec-" eats up 8 more bytes,
Hi
Am 20.04.2024 um 12:13 schrieb Peter Thomassen:
[...]
The main question then is to get implementations updated. I'm thus
copying a few implementers so they can comment w.r.t. making this change
in their implementation. I suppose that barring their objections, it's
fine to go ahead?
Hi Paul,
The authors certainly don't insist, but we'd need to pick a suitable replacement for the
"_signal" label.
John proposed "_dnssec-signal" elsewhere in this thread.
The authors would like to note that adding "_dnssec-" eats up 8 more bytes, increasing
chances that bootstrapping will
