On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net> wrote:
> On Monday, October 10, 2016, Bob Harold <rharo...@umich.edu> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 2:53 AM, Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Just a reminder that the WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse
>>> will end later today (barring any stuck issues). The authors appear to have
>>> addressed all open issues (except JINMEI's last comments). Please read the
>>> current version here:
>>> and speak up with any final questions, concerns, etc.
>> (Reading the version at
>> https://github.com/wkumari/draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse in case it is
>> Section "3. Problem Statement"
>> The example domain includes a wildcard, but the text reads as though the
>> answer to "cat.example.com" would be that is does not exist. Should the
>> wildcard be removed for this example?
> Yes, yes it should.
> I was trying to avoid having two separate example zones, but, well,
> premature optimization and all that.. The way it is now is, um, just wrong.
... and I have just broken the example into two zones to address this
(example.com, example.org), and checked it into Github - please see
I'd really like some help writing / expanding the wildcard text -- I'd
initially removed the "positive" side because I wasn't sure how to
concisely / clearly describe it.
If anyone has text which they'd be willing to contribute, it would be
: Ok, I'll be completely honest - this was also way easier :-P
>> Bob Harold
> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in
> the first place.
> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
DNSOP mailing list