Dear all,

Thanks for your patience as I was on vacations when the publication of this I-D 
was requested. As the DNSOP responsible AD is also an author, I was selected as 
the acting responsible AD for this I-D. Hence, here are some comments that I 
want to be addressed (either by replying to me or by a revised I-D) before 
proceeding to the IETF Last Call.


  1.  The shepherd write-up is very terse , so far so good, but does not 
include a justification for the intended status (PS is the correct one of 
course)
  2.  Should this document update (in the meta-data, abstract, and 
introduction) RFCs 4034 and 5155 ? (I think so)
  3.  The phrasing of the last paragraph section 2 is weird with a mix of MUST 
and MAY
  4.  Section 5  "Digest Algorithms" registry, there is a Status field but no 
"Use for DNSSEC Delegation" field
  5.  Section 5 s/DNS Security Algorithm Numbers registry/“DNS Security 
Algorithm Numbers” registry/ and there is no “MUST NOT” value, just “N”

Once the above points are addressed, then I will proceed with the publication 
of this important document.

Regards,

-éric

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to