Orie Steele has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis-09: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # Orie Steele, ART AD, comments for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis-09 CC @OR13 * line numbers: - https://author-tools.ietf.org/api/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis-09.txt&submitcheck=True * comment syntax: - https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md * "Handling Ballot Positions": - https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ ## Comments Thanks to Barry Leiba for the ARTART review. ### Guidance to DEs for divergence? ``` 268 and "use". We note that the values for "Implement for" and "Use for" 269 may diverge in the future ``` The divergence that is expected here is probably that there will be more implementation than use, right? Some additional guidance to DEs might be helpful here. ## Nits ### KSK expand on first use. ``` 391 Upgrading algorithm at the same time as rolling the new KSK key will ``` _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
