Dear working group, the CfA for this document is ending in two days, so I am bringing this to your attention before the CfA ends.
Unless I have missed something, there was one voice except the co-author that supports the adoption of the document so far. Ondrej -- Ondřej Surý (He/Him) [email protected] > On 4. 12. 2025, at 13:48, Peter Thomassen via Datatracker <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Subject: Call for adoption: draft-berra-dnsop-announce-scanner-02 (Ends > 2025-12-18) > > This message starts a 2-week Call for Adoption for this document. > > Abstract: > In DNS operations, automated scanners are commonly employed by the > operator of a parent zone to detect the presence of specific records, > such as CDS or CSYNC, in child zones, indicating a desire for > delegation updates. However, the presence and periodicity of these > scanners are typically implicit and undocumented, leading to > inefficiencies and uncertainties. > > This document proposes an extension to the semantics of the DSYNC > resource record, as defined in [RFC9859], allowing parent zones to > explicitly signal the presence and scanning interval of such > automated scanners. This enhancement aims to improve transparency > and coordination between child and parent zones. > > TO BE REMOVED: This document is being collaborated on in Github at: > https://github.com/johanix/draft-berra-dnsop-announce-scanner > (https://github.com/johanix/draft-berra-dnsop-announce-scanner). The > most recent working version of the document, open issues, etc, should > all be available there. The authors (gratefully) accept pull > requests. > > File can be retrieved from: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-berra-dnsop-announce-scanner/ > > Please reply to this message keeping [email protected] in copy by indicating > whether you support or not the adoption of this draft as a WG document. > Comments to motivate your preference are highly appreciated. > > Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual > Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [2]. > Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions > of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any. > Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be > found at [3]. > > Thank you. > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/ > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/ > [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
