In addition, there is now also
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-livingood-dns-malwareprotect-01, which is
the malware redirect draft. The WG requested that this be split off from
the original draft, which we've now done.

Also in that original DNS redirect was a summary of redirect based on
legal mandate and one for content filtering.  I plan to hold off on
investing time in either of those for now, unless the WG would like to see
those specified in a new document.

Jason



On 9/6/10 2:30 PM, "Livingood, Jason" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>It's been a little over a year since the first draft on this subject was
>submitted.  I received a lot of feedback on that draft from the WG,
>including a request to remove all forms of redirect mentioned other than
>web error redirection (such as malware protection) and to add a much more
>pointed section concerning DNSSEC.  All of that should now be completed.
>
>I welcome any review and comment on
>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-livingood-dns-redirect-02.
>
>Some key notes:
>- snippet from Abstract: This document specifically and narrowly
>addresses those cases where DNS Redirect is being utilized to provide a
>web error redirect service to end users, and describes the critical
>implications for DNS Redirect when DNSSEC is deployed.
>
>- snippet from new Section 4: DNSSEC Considerations and Implications: It
>is critically important that service providers understand that adoption
>of DNSSEC is technically incompatible with DNS redirect. As such, in
>order to properly implement DNSSEC and maintain a valid chain of trust,
>DNS redirect MUST NOT be used any longer. Thus, once DNSSEC is in
>widespread use, this document should be considered historical. That being
>said, sections of this document concerning opt-in and opt-out practices
>may be useful for future reference in other, unrelated documents.

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to