Re: [dane] clarify, are SMIMEA and OPENPGPKEY drafts experimental?

On Thursday, July 30, 2015 08:31:02 AM Olafur Gudmundsson wrote: > > On Jul 28, 2015, at 8:11 AM, Wiley, Glen wrote: > > > > Was a decision taken to make the SMIMEA and OPENPGPKEY drafts experimental > > rather than standards track? — > > The chairs and AD’s are worried that Sandards track is a

Re: [dane] The DANE draft

Paul Wouters writes: >> Here are some thoughts, anyway: >> >> - Why a new DNS record despite that the CERT type has PGP support for >> 9 years now (RFC-4398). >> >> The argument for a new record is that this makes parsing easier >> because there is no need to loop over the record's sub-types.

Re: [dane] clarify, are SMIMEA and OPENPGPKEY drafts experimental?

> On Jul 28, 2015, at 8:11 AM, Wiley, Glen wrote: > > Was a decision taken to make the SMIMEA and OPENPGPKEY drafts experimental > rather than standards track? > — The chairs and AD’s are worried that Sandards track is a “bridge to far” at this point. Thus going for experimental is simpler

Re: [dane] [OT] Deployment news (Germany is plowing ahead)

On Tue, 28 Jul 2015, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: I've mentioned before that much of the deployment (> 30%) for DANE SMTP is in Germany. Today something unprecedented happened. The OPENPGPKEY deployment/coders also have a strong German component. Paul _

Re: [dane] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-dane-ops-14: (with COMMENT)

Hi, Viktor; thanks for the quick response, and thanks for making the changes. >> -- Section 4 -- >> >>Protocol designers need to carefully consider which set of DANE >>certificate usages to support. >> >> I'm not sure why this (and the next sentence) is referring to "protocol >> designers"