> On Dec 13, 2022, at 18:50, Wessels, Duane
> wrote:
>
>
> I
> I still think the requirements for library (stub) and caching resolver
> behavior should be stronger. i.e. MUST NOT put .alt queries on the wire.
> But this is probably a minority opinion.
Earlier I had said “should use qu
I will reiterate some of my concerns with the draft:
I find the format of section 3.2 to be very strange. As a paragraph it jumbles
some items together. It should be a list format like the ones in RFCs 6761 and
7686.
Section 3.2 does not say how applications that do not use .alt should behave
Dear DNSOP,
I support advancing the document in its current form.
There's a broken sentence in Section 5:
"Care must be taken to ensure that the mapping of thepseudo-TLD into its
corresponding non-DNS name resolution system inorder to get whatever security is offered
by that system."
--> the
Hiya,
This is good enough, so should proceed.
In terms of substantive comments, I can only think of
arguments that have already been thrashed out so won't
raise any of 'em.
A suggestion/nit which I'm fine to see ignored: the
text in section 4 (Privacy Considerations) isn't that
clear and might
Dear colleagues,
This message will serve to start a Working Group Last Call on “The ALT Special
Use Top Level Domain”
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld/). Due to the
end-of-year holidays, we’re starting it now and will give it four weeks.
As you’ve seen from Paul Hof
Greetings again. As you can see, Warren and I just updated the draft to reflect
the WG discussion at IETF 115 and on the list after that. At IETF 115, the WG
chairs said that they might move this to a second WG Last Call soon.
In the discussion, there was lots of active disagreement about reduci
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations WG of the IETF.
Title : The ALT Special Use Top Level Domain
Authors : Warren Kumari
Paul Hof
Dear WG,
The proposal to make the term "bailiwick" historical has found consensus in
the WG. We are now using "in-domain" and "sibling" name servers as the
preferred terms. This was suggested during the interim meeting and no
objections were raised on the mailing list. No good alternative term was
A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Tim Wicinski, a Chair
of the dnsop working group.
-
Working Group Name: Domain Name System Operations
Area Name: Operations and Management Area
Session Requester: Tim Wicinski
Nu
