On Sep 10, 2012, at 3:22 PM, James Cloos <[email protected]> wrote:

> +1 on adopting.
> 
> As for the draft, do we really need a new RR?
> 
> If the content is the same as TLSA, just with a different naming scheme,
> why not just use TLSA?

Because the semantics of the record are different. The TLSA record was 
specifically defined for TLS.

> A requirement to update dns software for every new use case might be an

> excessive burden on the community.

Could be, but overloading the TLSA record could have bad side-effects as well. 
I would rather err on the side of safety here.

--Paul Hoffman
_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane

Reply via email to