I've read this draft.
I think its a simple and straightforward proposal. It explicitly notes
the security issue that its not covered by DNSSEC, it has
implementations, and it had a good discussion run 2021/2022 which was
overwhelmingly positive.
I had no problems understanding the intent. its
Colleagues,
This email begins a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-zoneversion-02
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-zoneversion/).
If you've reviewed this document and think it's ready for publication, please
let us and the WG know, by responding on-list to this
The IESG has received a request from the Domain Name System Operations WG
(dnsop) to consider the following document: - 'DNS Glue Requirements in
Referral Responses'
as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action.
John Scudder has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld-23: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer to
Since that is an email/dkim discussion and this is not the right forum for it I
will not argue it here. I will also not be changing my p= value. Noone should
forward an email message with unmodified headers in 2023. Encapsulate it rather
than forging my domain.
I'd like our chairs to stop
It appears that Paul Vixie said:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>i don't know why it was rejected as spam but his sysadmin might.
>
It's because redbarn.org has a p=reject DMARC policy.
To summarize a lot of prior discussion, "don't do that".
R's,
John
___
DNSOP
Just a quick more to say thank you for your review.
Warren.
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 11:19 AM, Vladimír Čunát wrote:
> Reviewer: Vladimír Čunát
> Review result: Ready
>
> There've only been nits between -22 and -23; certainly no objections there
> and thus nothing new for me to say.
>
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 10:11 AM, Lars Eggert wrote:
> Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld-23: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to
On Sun, Apr 23, 2023 at 4:16 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> Paul Wouters has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld-23: Yes
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
Thank you Paul.
The problem seems to be with DKIM and header rewriting by
ietfa.amsl.com. We are in contact to resolve this, but it doesn't seem
easy. Turning off DKIM on my side doesn't seem like an option, but we're
working on an alternative solution.
If anyone else has this problem using
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 4:04 AM, Éric Vyncke wrote:
> Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld-23: Yes
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
>
i don't know why it was rejected as spam but his sysadmin might.
--- Begin Message ---
This is the mail system at host ietfa.amsl.com.
I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not
be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below.
For further assistance, please send
Hi Warren!
Thanks for the explanations to my feedback.
From: Warren Kumari
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 11:49 AM
To: Roman Danyliw
Cc: The IESG ; draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-...@ietf.org;
dnsop-cha...@ietf.org; dnsop@ietf.org; suzworldw...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on
Shumon Huque wrote on 2023-04-26 08:43:
I support adoption too.
As I've mentioned earlier, this mechanism is widely deployed and needs a
published specification. Adopting the work will also allow us to
formally specify an accurate NXDOMAIN signal (and work out its related
details more
On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 4:54 PM, Roman Danyliw wrote:
> Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld-23: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free
I support adoption too.
As I've mentioned earlier, this mechanism is widely deployed and needs a
published specification. Adopting the work will also allow us to formally
specify an accurate NXDOMAIN signal (and work out its related details more
fully).
Shumon.
On Sun, Apr 16, 2023 at 8:54 PM
On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 9:20 PM Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> Similarly add an unknown EDNS option (pick a value between 1000 and 1999)
> to every QUERY until 1 Jan 2025 and if it comes back FORMERR with an OPT
> record present, drop the response. 10 years after cleaning up the EDNS
> specification
On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 7:04 PM Puneet Sood wrote:
> I wanted to respond to this thread earlier, so apologies in advance
> for late posting and if this is a no-op at this point. Me getting
> confused about the last call for this draft
>
Suzanne Woolf has requested publication of
draft-ietf-dnsop-glue-is-not-optional-08 as Proposed Standard on behalf of the
DNSOP working group.
Please verify the document's state at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-glue-is-not-optional/
19 matches
Mail list logo
