Hi all,
Some of you will perhaps recall that previous efforts at text on
referrals were unsuccessful. I've had another go. I _think_ it
addresses all the comments so far, without actually causing the
terminology draft to drift into prescribing protocol. It is
unfortunately quite a bit longer,
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 02:52:11PM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> I think that it would be better to remove "global DNS". It is not a
> technical definition and it assumes things like the mythical "names
> operational community".
I don't believe the "names operational community" is
On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 7:22 AM william manning
wrote:
> your wrote,: "In the real world, the user will not be expected to figure
> this out [...] -- a bit of JS on www.example.com will do the 3 fetches
> and report "You'll be just fine", "You will have issues, call
Hi Warren, all,
On 15-01-18 02:51, Warren Kumari wrote:
> The (new) rules:
> A: If the qname starts with _is-ta, and the included keyid is *NOT* in
> the trust store, the resolver changes the answer to a SERVFAIL
> (otherwise things proceed normally).
> B: If the qname starts with _not-ta and the
On 15 Jan 2018, at 07:22, KenM wrote:
> I think its a bit sad that for the DNS to work, one now needs to run http[s]
> and JS. So much for stand alone protocols. Now if you could show how this
> works without JS or HTTP, then we might be getting somewhere.
We
your wrote,: "In the real world, the user will not be expected to figure
this out [...] -- a bit of JS on www.example.com will do the 3 fetches and
report "You'll be just fine", "You will have issues, call your ISP and get
them to install the new key" or "Sorry, cannot tell. Call your ISP and