On 20-05-2026 12:47 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Hi Andy, all,
I trust the authors will engage soon.
Rather than repeating the exception/implication of not following a SHOULD for
these items, the document factorizes that given that the same reasoning applies:
CURRENT:
The recommendations optimize interoperability and safety. In certain
cases, local policy may take precedence, such as when a registry is
subjected to national cryptographic policy requirements or performs
out-of-band verification of DS changes with a human for high-stake
domains. However, not following any requirements designated with the
"SHOULD" key word will generally lead to undesirable effects of
ambiguity and interoperability issues. When implementing these
recommendations, operators have to carefully weigh whether any
particular deviation is justified in their particular context.
Cheers,
Med
Hi Med,
I appreciate the difficulty with balancing the need to allow local policy while
offering technical guidance.
Can the above be strengthened? Such as the last sentence:
When implementing these recommendations, operators MUST mitigate issues
arising from
any particular deviation.
-andy
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
