Deb Cooley has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error-24: Discuss
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-structured-dns-error/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm making this a discuss, but I'm happy for the authors to point me to something I've missed. It is related to Roman's discuss, I see. Section 10.1, para 1: 'This specification assumes the use of authenticated, integrity-protected...', but it doesn't appear to be required and/or suggested anywhere besides Security Considerations of both this draft and RFC 8914? Is it specified somewhere else? It seems odd to assume this sort of thing with nothing mentioned in the main body of the specification. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks to Joe Salowey for their secdir review - and follow up messages. Section 10.1, para 1: DOQ is mentioned parenthetically, is QUIC (RFC9000) an acceptable transport mechanism? _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
