Thanks Bernie, in any case for raising this. It is always good information
to process and think of carefully before bringing any conclusion.
Yours,
Daniel
On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 1:46 PM Bernie Volz (volz) wrote:
> Regarding RSOO, that’s fine if it doesn’t meet your needs. Just wanted to
>
To Paul's point, this is the ICANN Base Registry Agreement listing the
permitted "TLD Zone Contents".
https://newgtlds.icann.org/sites/default/files/agreements/agreement-approved-31jul17-en.html#exhibitA.1
This is only for gTLDs that have signed this agreement. The ccTLDs
generally have their
On May 12, 2021, at 18:56, Ben Schwartz wrote:
>
>
>> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 7:28 PM Paul Wouters wrote:
>
>> You won't be able to rely on these updated for many years to come.
>
> I agree, but I still think this draft represents a good approach, and we
> should adopt it.
>
> In my
___
dns-privacy mailing list
dns-privacy@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
Need security privacy on phone
___
dns-privacy mailing list
dns-privacy@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
Regarding RSOO, that’s fine if it doesn’t meet your needs. Just wanted to raise
it as it probably isn’t considered as often as it should be.
* Bernie
From: Daniel Migault
Date: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 at 1:11 PM
To: Michael Richardson
Cc: Ted Lemon , int-a...@ietf.org ,
dh...@ietf.org ,
Hi,
Thank you all for the feedbacks. I will perform the editorial once we have
settled the terminology.
Regarding the use of a DHCP Relay, we could of course make a use case of
it, but I believe it would go beyond the simplicity of the targeted
architecture and I would rather not consider this as
> On 5 May 2021, at 05:44, Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker
> wrote:
>
> Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-dprive-xfr-over-tls-11: Discuss
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and
