I agree new code points should gave new RFCs.
I am ok with OBSOLETE or DEPRECATED
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 29, 2023, at 17:18, Paul Wouters wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023, Warren Kumari wrote:
> So, the IANA has a question:
> IANA Question --> What about the registrations that currently
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023, Warren Kumari wrote:
So, the IANA has a question:
IANA Question --> What about the registrations that currently reference RFC5933?
Should the registrations currently referencing RFC5933 be marked "OBSOLETE,"
"DEPRECATED," changed in
some other way, or left alone?
If
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 6:08 PM, Paul Hoffman
wrote:
> [[Forwarding this to DNSOP because apparently the IESG forgot to...]]
>
Thank you.
> The IESG has received a request from an individual participant to make the
> following status changes:
>
> - RFC5933 from Proposed Standard to Historic
Hi DNSOP,
This draft is essentially identical to -02 except for the new Appendix A, which
discuss the impact of Unknown Key-Share Attacks:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-dane-03#name-unknown-key-share-attacks
I would appreciate more review on that section, which
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-dane-03.txt is now available. It is a
work item of the Domain Name System Operations (DNSOP) WG of the IETF.
Title: Using DNSSEC Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) with DNS
Service Bindings (SVCB) and QUIC
Authors: Benjamin M. Schwartz
> On 29 Nov 2023, at 12:43, Nicolai Leymann via Datatracker via dnsdir
> wrote:
>
> I found no major or minor issues and think the draft is in a good
> shape and can be progressed.
Great stuff Nic! Many thanks.
___
DNSOP mailing list
