| I thought we all agreed the IESG would mark the old GOST RFCs Historic and then the new RFCs don’t have to obsolete anything ?
Paul
Sent using a virtual keyboard on a phone
Eliot and Warren,
As I remember, the idea was to split original
draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis to two different RFCs - one in the
ISE stream which should describe the operations for use GOST-2012
algorithms in DNSSEC, and other in the IETF stream which should
obsolete RFC 5933 and update RFC 8624.
I suggest to move on both draft-makarenko-gost2012-dnssec and
draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis (I'll make changes to the drafts once
you answer me) to resolve this situation.
Boris
22.10.2023 15:38, Independent
Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear) пишет:
A quick status from the ISE:
draft-makarenko-gost2012-dnssec was formally submitted to me
for consideration as an independent RFC in May of this year.
Before I make a publication decision, there are a number of
issues that need to be addressed:
- What to do about RFC 5933? The original draft obsoleted
that RFC, and independent submissions can't do that.
- What to do about the very minor update that the original
draft made to RFC 8624. Again, independent submissions can't
make changes to status of IETF works.
- There are also some IANA issues that must be resolved. A
special thank you to Amanda for catching them.
As to the work's stream, the authors brought their document to
the ISE and it is likely to meet the publication criteria, once
the above issues are addressed. If the IETF now decides to
still move forward on draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis, that's fine
with me as well. My one request, should this matter be
reconsidered, is that the matter be discussed and decided in a
timely fashion, in fairness to the authors. I'll be around in
Prague, and I look forward to seeing many of you.
Eliot
On 21.10.2023 19:24, Warren Kumari
wrote:
[ +DNSOP for real this time]
Dear DNSOP,
I accidentally did a bad.
Back in December 2022, when we were
progressing draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis, I sent this
mail, but I missed the fact that DNSOP was not actually
on the To: line, and so missed these discussions.
I also should have mentioned to the WG the
ISE was progressing draft-makarenko-gost2012-dnssec-03
and asked y'all to review. Basically I was just received
that it was finally moving along, and completely spaced
on the "Oh, yeah, I should make sure DNSOP has seen
this" bit.
Apologies,
W
P.S: The discussions leading up to the ISE
bit are all from 10-11 months ago, so I've swapped out
much of the state, and am still swapping it back in…
_______________________________________________DNSOP mailing list[email protected]https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
|
