Seems like a good idea to make this more consistent.

A correction for the first paragraph: change

   DNSSEC is primarily described in [RFC4033], [RFC4034], and [RFC4035].
   DNSSEC commonly uses two resource records beyond those defined in RFC
   4034: DS [RFC3658] and NSEC3 [RFC5155].

to

   DNSSEC is primarily described in [RFC4033], [RFC4034], and [RFC4035].
   DNSSEC commonly uses two resource records beyond those defined in RFC
   4034: NSEC3 and NSEC3PARAM [RFC5155].

DS is specified in RFC 4034. I suppose it's OK to omit CDS and CDNSKEY
sinec they don't have any separate IANA considerations :-)

Is it possible to ask IANA to combine the registries a bit? I would prefer
it if there were one page of DNS parameter assignments, or maybe two with
a separate page for DNSSEC. At the moment there are:

https://www.ietf.org/assignments/dns-parameters
https://www.ietf.org/assignments/dns-sec-alg-numbers
https://www.ietf.org/assignments/dnskey-flags
https://www.ietf.org/assignments/dnssec-nsec3-parameters
https://www.ietf.org/assignments/sig-alg-numbers

And https://www.ietf.org/assignments/tsig-algorithm-names
which is misfiled - it is not listed under the DNS heading at
https://www.ietf.org/assignments/

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <[email protected]>  http://dotat.at/
defend the right to speak, write, worship, associate, and vote freely

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

Reply via email to