Robert Moskowitz writes: > > Value Description > > > > 1 A DSA Public Key is present, in the format defined in [RFC2536] > > 2 A RSA Public Key is present, in the format defined in [RFC3110] > > 3 An ECDSA Public Key is present, in the format defined in [RFC6605] > > I can remove the reference column? It seems this is always called for. > So either we accept the build errors that still result in a usable > draft, or we make these entries two lines like:
How about we cut the "is present" text. I do not think it gives any useful information. I mean if there is key in format defined in some rfc in this RR, then yes, the key is present, we do not need to repeat that. 0 No key is present 1 A DSA Public Key in the format defined in [RFC2536] 2 A RSA Public Key in the format defined in [RFC3110] 3 An ECDSA Public Key in the format defined in [RFC6605] Or we could even split the reference and format in different columns: Value Description Format description Reference 0 No key is present [RFC4025] 1 A DSA Public Key [RFC2536] Section 2 [RFC4025] 2 A RSA Public Key [RFC3110] Section 2 [RFC4025] 3 An ECDSA Public Key [RFC6605] Section 4 [RFC4025] TBD1 An EdDSA Public Key [RFC8080] Section 3 [ThisRFC] Adding the section numbers would be useful, as those documents define both DNSKEY and RRSIG resource records, so pointing to one of them helps. -- [email protected] _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
