FC 8499 (Obsoleted by RFC 9499)
thanks
tim
> --Paul Hoffman
>
>
> On Jun 5, 2024, at 08:25, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> >
> > All
> >
> > The chairs are requesting some final comments on
> draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis. As you might recall, this docume
All
The chairs are requesting some final comments on
draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis. As you might recall, this document has already
been through WGLC and had consensus to advance, but our AD reviewed it and
raised some additional questions. (Warren Kumari, “AD Review of
draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis,”
Tim Wicinski has requested publication of draft-ietf-dnsop-zoneversion-06 as
Informational on behalf of the DNSOP working group.
Please verify the document's state at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-zoneversion/
___
DNSOP mailing
in this discussion.
tim
(just a contributor)
On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 10:29 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
> I wrote a note to Peter and his co-author on this discussion and
> we(chairs) feel that Paul W is correct in saying _signal is too generic.
>
> We should not overload any underscore label for multi
I wrote a note to Peter and his co-author on this discussion and we(chairs)
feel that Paul W is correct in saying _signal is too generic.
We should not overload any underscore label for multiple purposes. If
another type of operator signalling appears, a new label can be acquired.
Being specific
All
These were discussed at the last IETF and the chairs felt there was
consensus to request adoption.
This starts a Call for Adoption for:
draft-hardaker-dnsop-rfc8624-bis
draft-hardaker-dnsop-must-not-sha1
draft-hardaker-dnsop-must-not-ecc-gost
The drafts are available here:
All
Thanks for two successful sessions of DNSOP and thanks to Paul Hoffman for
his note taking !
I've uploaded the minutes into the datatracker:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/119/materials/minutes-119-dnsop-01
I made sure the links to the chat logs for the DNSOP sessions are in the
Tim Wicinski has requested publication of
draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping-07 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-dnssec-bootstrapping
Not wearing any hats, really
I want to thank Wes and Warren for putting this together and I think this
is a good way to build on the good work that RFC8624 produced.
tim
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Hi
This working group last call wrapped up last week, but between OARC and a
multi-vendor CVE I allowed myself to get distracted.
I'll do the shepherd writeup later this week
thanks
tim
On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 6:23 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> All
>
> Peter has integrated f
Again thanks to mr Hoffman for minutes, here they are and uploaded in
the datatracker and our git repo
Thank you one and all for having great productive conversations!
tim
DNSOP WG
Interim meeting 2024-01-30 1700 UTC
Chairs: Benno Overeinder, Suzanne Woolf, Tim Wicinski
Minutes taken by Paul
John
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 11:29 AM John Dickinson wrote:
> On 30/01/2024 16:21, Joe Abley wrote:
> > On 30 Jan 2024, at 15:57, Roy Arends wrote:
>
> >>> If an authority server is capable of loading a DELEG RRSet and
> generating referral responses accordingly, it's surely also possible of
(my vibes only)
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 11:21 AM Joe Abley wrote:
>
>
> I think specifying rules about which to prefer is important. But I also
> think it's worth thinking more pessimistically around what kinds of
> failures will result when people get that wrong. We have already seen this
>
Wes
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 6:45 PM Wes Hardaker wrote:
> IESG Secretary writes:
>
> > The Domain Name System Operations (dnsop) WG will hold a virtual
> > interim meeting on 2024-01-30 from 18:00 to 19:00 Europe/Amsterdam
> > (17:00 to 18:00 UTC).
>
> I'm sadly very day-job conflicted with
. If someone
feels we missed something, please speak up.
thanks
tim
On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 6:23 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> All
>
> Peter has integrated feedback from the first working group last call, and
> we'd like to do a followup last call. The diff with the current ve
Tim Wicinski has requested publication of draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis-02 as
Best Current Practice on behalf of the DNSOP working group.
Please verify the document's state at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis/
___
DNSOP
PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
> All
>
>
> This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis
> "Initializing a DNS Resolver with Priming Queries"
>
> Current versions of the draft is available here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf
All
Peter has integrated feedback from the first working group last call, and
we'd like to do a followup last call. The diff with the current version is
here:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping-05=draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping-07=--html
This
Thanks Peter and Paul
I'll review the revised I-D but we were thinking of going another (perhaps
shorter) follow up working group last call
tim
On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 8:59 AM Peter Thomassen wrote:
> For the record, Paul and I sorted these out off-list (for real, this
> time!), and I'll
we missed something, please speak up.
thanks
tim
On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 8:54 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
> All
>
>
> This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis
> "Initializing a DNS Resolver with Priming Queries"
>
> Current versions of the d
All
This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis
"Initializing a DNS Resolver with Priming Queries"
Current versions of the draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis/
The Current Intended Status of this document is: Best
, 2023 at 3:14 AM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> The WGLC closes next week, Saturday, December 24.
>
>
> This should say *Sunday* December 24.
>
> thanks
>
> Tim
> (currently double checking some appointments)
>
>>
___
On Sat, Dec 16, 2023 at 9:55 AM Tim Wicinski wrote:
> Dear WG,
>
> The working group was asked to adopt draft-bash-rfc7958bis “DNSSEC Trust
> Anchor Publication for the Root Zone” as a working group document, and the
> call went out on October 12 this year. So far we've seen on
The WGLC closes next week, Saturday, December 24.
This should say *Sunday* December 24.
thanks
Tim
(currently double checking some appointments)
>
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Dear WG,
After the premature start of the first Working Group Last Call (WGLC) for
draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis by the chairs, a second WGLC was initiated on
October 10, 2023.
The document has remained relatively stable over the past two years, except
for the addition of missing sections in the
Dear WG,
The working group was asked to adopt draft-bash-rfc7958bis “DNSSEC Trust
Anchor Publication for the Root Zone” as a working group document, and the
call went out on October 12 this year. So far we've seen one support email
on the list, and during the IETF 117 DNSOP WG session the chairs
All
Apologies for taking a bit longer than we thought, but we wanted to send
out our list of chair's actions taken from the last meeting.
If anyone thinks we missed something please let us know.
thanks
tim
---
## IETF118 Chairs Actions
### Actions
* draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping
DNSOP
DNSSD has placed a call for adoption for Ray Bellis' document on Multi
Qtypes. Current version is here.
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bellis-dnsext-multi-qtypes-08.html
The DNSOP chairs would like the DNSOP working group to comment on this call
for adoption.
We are aware that not
to review to make sure if you are quoted that you are
quoted correctly, etc.
The chairs are working up a list of actions to take from the meeting that
we'll send out this week.
Tim
along with Benno and Suzanne
DNSOP WG
IETF 118, Prague
Chairs: Benno Overeinder, Suzanne Woolf, Tim Wicinski
Minutes
roup Last Call for
> draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping
>
> > On 9/19/23 21:48, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> > >
> > > This starts a Working Group Last Call for
> draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping
> > >
> > > Current
Martine
First thanks for the presentation this morning. Second, I am your DNS
Directorate reviewer for draft-ietf-core-dns-over-coap,
and I realize I owe your latest versions a review. Geoff/Jim - I wonder if
we should have a second pair of eyes on this document?
While I am not one of the DNS
on,
> Resulting in potentially unwanted censorship...
>
> Gianpaolo
>
> Inviato da Outlook per Android <https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
>
>
> C2 General
> --
> *Da:* Ben Schwartz
> *Inviato:* Giovedì, Novembre 9, 2023 5:14:26 PM
> *A:*
On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 10:02 AM Ben Schwartz wrote:
> Note that "mailto" URIs can pre-populate subject and body contents, so
> information about the specific blocked item and other metadata could be
> populated automatically. This seems sufficient for enterprise use cases
> like allowing
Overeinder [be...@nlnetlabs.nl](be...@nlnetlabs.nl)
* Suzanne Woolf [suzworldw...@gmail.com](suzworldw...@gmail.com)
* Tim Wicinski [tjw.i...@gmail.com](tjw.i...@gmail.com)
### IESG Overlord
* Warren Kumari [war...@kumari.net](war...@kumari.net)
### Document Status
* [Github](https://github.com
Hi
This is another relatively small document that is updating RFC7958,
and needs to be updated prior to the next KSK rollover.
This starts a Call for Adoption for draft-bash-rfc7958bis
"DNSSEC Trust Anchor Publication for the Root Zone"
The draft is available here:
draft-ietf-dnsop-qdcount-is-one into the datatracker.
The chairs hope Mr. Bellis is rested from his holiday to address this task.
thanks
tim
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 12:59 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> We want to thank Joe and Ray for getting this republished with the notes
> from the
Hi All
We had so much fun the first timeActually this chair wishes to thank Mr
Abley and Mr Huston for catching our error so quickly, and we apologize for
any and all inconvenience.
I did go back and looked at the history AND also reread the document.
I do wish to point out that there are 4
All
I know this was a bit longer than a week, but we wanted to receive some
confirmations from folks with questions on implementations. We've received
that, and the chairs feel the consensus is to move forward.
Thanks
tim
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 2:27 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
> (forgive
Tim Wicinski has requested publication of
draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation-15 as Best Current Practice on behalf of
the DNSOP working group.
Please verify the document's state at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation
Paul,
Thanks for getting an update done!. I started reviewing it (as now I
want to double check), but we should should get this out back on the top of
the stack.
tim
On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 6:16 PM Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On Sep 14, 2023, at 18:46, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> > We
Tim Wicinski has requested publication of draft-ietf-dnsop-zoneversion-04 as
Informational on behalf of the DNSOP working group.
Please verify the document's state at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-zoneversion/
___
DNSOP mailing
We want to thank Joe and Ray for getting this republished with the notes
from the previous meeting.
Thanks Ted and Eric for their comments today, we will remember them.
I will say that this chair likes the appendix, to remind me what I
have glossed over, as the authors have already corrected me
Thanks Joe for pulling this together.
tim
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 10:57 AM Ted Lemon wrote:
> Thanks for the update. I think this does the job. I could do without the
> appendix, but I understand the urge to fully document. :)
>
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 9:40 AM Joe Abley wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
This starts a Working Group Last Call for
draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping
Current versions of the draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-bootstrapping/
The Current Intended Status of this document is: Standards Track
This Document will update
(forgive my missing subject previously)
All
After pulling this back (Thanks Peter again), we went back to the authors
and
In the case of the DF bit, the wording is changed from
"UDP responders are RECOMMENDED" to "UDP responders MAY"
They also added some additional text in the security
Followup One Week Working Group Last Call for
draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation
All
After pulling this back (Thanks Peter again), we went back to the authors
and
In the case of the DF bit, the wording is changed from
"UDP responders are RECOMMENDED" to "UDP responders MAY"
They also added
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 5:01 AM Joe Abley wrote:
> Hi Murray!
>
> Op 17 sep. 2023 om 08:07 heeft Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <
> nore...@ietf.org> het volgende geschreven:
>
> > I thought the IESG (though maybe not this particular one) had previously
> > discouraged publishing "living
All
We chairs heard back from the authors and we're pulling this working group
last call.
I want to share some background - Paul and I talked at 117 and he said the
document is ready, and I trust Paul
implicitly in these matters. Then when the dnsdir review came back as it
was I was like "OK".
Peter
On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 11:33 AM Peter van Dijk
wrote:
> Hello Tim,
>
> On Wed, 2023-08-16 at 15:45 -0700, Tim Wicinski via Datatracker wrote:
> > Tim Wicinski has requested publication of
> draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation-14 as Best Current Practice on behalf
>
call to put more eyes onto a document.
tim
On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 5:30 PM Geoff Huston wrote:
>
>
> > On 14 Sep 2023, at 6:25 am, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 5:20 PM Joe Abley wrote:
> > Hi Tim,
> >
>
On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 5:20 PM Joe Abley wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> Op 13 sep. 2023 om 23:06 heeft Tim Wicinski het
> volgende geschreven:
>
>
> This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis
> "Initializing a DNS Resolver with Priming
Hi All
We Chairs are back and catching up, and want to get things moving again.
This starts a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis
"Initializing a DNS Resolver with Priming Queries"
Current versions of the draft is available here:
All,
Thanks for another productive session of DNSOP. Paul's minutes have been
uploaded. If you made comments at the microphone, please confirm everything
is accurate.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-117-dnsop/
Tim Wicinski has requested publication of
draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation-14 as Best Current Practice on behalf of
the DNSOP working group.
Please verify the document's state at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation
Duane/Evan/Mukund/All,
What do feel is the consensus on lowering the value to 1 second ?
>From the previous suggested text:
Resolvers MUST cache resolution failures for at least 1 second.
The initial duration SHOULD be configurable by the operator. A
longer cache duration for
Peter
On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 3:37 AM Peter van Dijk
wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-07-05 at 18:51 -0400, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> All
>
> The authors of draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation worked with different
> implementers to expand upon the index of Known Implementations, and wha
e operator.
thanks
tim
> DW
>
>
>
> > On Jul 23, 2023, at 9:00 PM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > All,
> >
> > We had a discussion this morning during the hackathon about a value with
> > the document caching-resolution-failu
All,
We had a discussion this morning during the hackathon about a value with
the document caching-resolution-failures. The current text in 3.2 says:
Resolvers MUST cache resolution failures for at least 5 seconds. The
value of 5 seconds is chosen as a reasonable amount of time that an
Presenters,
DNSOP is less than 24 hours away and we have one set of slides.
Please submit your slides here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/117/session/dnsop
or to the chairs.
The Chairs slides will be uploaded shortly
tim
___
DNSOP mailing
ownership could
>> > be determined by creation time (i.e. it's a race condition without a
>> > stronger mechanism.)
>>
>> Explicit disavowal should be able to solve this too, if the IP addresses
>> targetted can be reasonably safely (multiple samples over a peri
Tim Wicinski has requested publication of
draft-ietf-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-05 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-caching-resolution-failures
All
Shivan, Shumon and Paul have incorporated feedback from the WG as well as
several area reviews, and more.
It's a much better document because of that, and we thank everyone.
The chairs want to give the WG a 7-10 days to review the changes and
confirm there are no issues
thanks
tim
On Mon,
ve support for it.
Thanks
tim
On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 6:58 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> All,
>
> The chairs want to thank everyone for the feedback on this document
> recently. We've been in discussions with Warren and the authors about this
> document, and we have some questions we'd like
All
The authors of draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation worked with different
implementers to expand upon the index of Known Implementations, and what
they implement specifically.
The chairs would like to have a one week follow up Working Group Last Call
comment period. We are looking for
Erik
I placed your excellent comments into the author's issue tracker, then we
decided to split them up into separate issues.
Take a look to confirm. If anything is wrong, it's one me
tim
APEX domains, and hostnames vs domains
to this email thread as something that
can be addressed.
Authors should fill free to submit to the ISE. We will alert them as well
tim
On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 4:18 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> All
>
> Draft-dulaunoy-dnsop-passive-dns-cof was originally submitted back in
> 2014, and has h
Momoka
Thanks for making DNSOP aware of this. We encourage anyone with comments
on the document adoption to reach out.
Everything I've heard and read on this work (wearing no hats) is that this
is good work and should be adopted.
thanks
tim
On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 5:15 AM Momoka Yamamoto
All
The Working Group Last Call has completed and the chairs thank everyone for
their comments.
It appears that the authors have addressed all issues, and the document is
ready to advance.
tim
On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 11:00 AM Tim Wicinski wrote:
> All
>
> This starts a Working G
All
Draft-dulaunoy-dnsop-passive-dns-cof was originally submitted back in 2014,
and has had 10 revisions since then.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dulaunoy-dnsop-passive-dns-cof/
Note that the format is now fixed, and there are several implementations.
We had asked DNSOP (in the poll
All
The Chairs have been talking about this for awhile, and we want to try an
experiment and to start holding open 'office hours.' This would be a time
when anyone is welcome to drop in and chat with the chairs about mentoring,
roadblocks on drafts, cross-area concerns, process questions, etc.
All
This starts a Working Group Last Call for
draft-ietf-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures
Current versions of the draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures/
The Current Intended Status of this document is: Proposed
Standard/Standards
Ben
Thanks for this, this will help the chairs. What we would like to hear
from is perhaps one of the many folks who have done operational work with
DANE and can add any comments.
thanks
tim
On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 9:46 AM Ben Schwartz wrote:
> I wanted to remind DNSOP to take another look
of larger issues
thanks
tim
On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 11:52 AM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> All,
>
> We've had this document in DNSOP for a bit and Peter has presented three
> different meetings. When I went back and looked at the minutes, the
> feedback was good. But when the
All
The chairs have been looking at two different drafts discussing the use of
using DNS NOTIFY to update DNSSEC information. The two drafts are:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-thomassen-dnsop-generalized-dns-notify-01
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dsawp-notify-00
, May 29, 2023 at 6:58 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> All,
>
> The chairs want to thank everyone for the feedback on this document
> recently. We've been in discussions with Warren and the authors about this
> document, and we have some questions we'd like the working group to
, review, etc.
This call for adoption ends: 21 June 2023
Thanks,
tim wicinski
For DNSOP co-chairs
Minutes from past meetings on "Consistency for CDS/CDNSKEY and CSYNC is
Mandatory"
114
Mark: CDS records are no different than any others
One NS might be down, which
All
Thanks for the feedback on the call for adoption for this document. The
call for adoption has completed and the chairs consider this work adopted.
thanks
tim
On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 10:01 AM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> All
>
> The authors for RFC8109 have made some updates to th
DNSOP/DPRIVE
Martin Thompson is chairing this year's version of the IETF Nominating
Committee. It's a good thing to volunteer, and I can speak strongly on the
fact that 10+ years of volunteering, and I have not been selected(*).
tim
(8) Now that I've said that
-- Forwarded message
AM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> All
>
> The authors for RFC8109 have made some updates to their document
> "Initializing a DNS Resolver with Priming Queries", and are looking to
> have the
> work adopted by DNSOP.
>
> You can see the changes made since RFC8109 here
All,
The chairs want to thank everyone for the feedback on this document
recently. We've been in discussions with Warren and the authors about this
document, and we have some questions we'd like the working group to help us
resolve.
While this work was relevant when it was first written and
t, clearly stating your view.
Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.
This call for adoption ends: 7 June 2023
Thanks,
tim wicinski
For DNSOP co-chairs
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
For the record I agree strongly with Paul here.
Tim, as co-chair but my hat hides my hair
On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 12:10 PM Paul Hoffman wrote:
> It would be grand if a bunch more people would speak up on this thread.
>
> --Paul Hoffman, wearing my co-author hat
>
> On Apr 27, 2023, at 1:05 PM,
All
The chairs have been coming to the consensus that this document is very
close/ready for working group last call.
if there are any thoughts, reviews, etc anyone has, please share.
thanks
tim
On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 5:40 AM Peter Thomassen wrote:
> Dear DNSOP,
>
> The news for this revision
Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> Happy Monday (UTC) All,
>
> The chairs heard some strong support to adopt and work on this.
>
> This starts a Call for Adoption for draft-huque-dnsop-compact-lies
>
> The authors did do some updates in the draft around the "lies" moniker.
(speaking as a chair)
On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 5:22 PM John R Levine wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Apr 2023, Miek Gieben wrote:
> >> I think it's an interesting idea but I also don't want to spend time on
> it
> >> if it's just going to be filed and forgotten.
> >
> > I looked into this for
ibute text, review, etc.
This call for adoption ends: April 29, 2023
Thanks,
tim wicinski
For DNSOP co-chairs
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
30, 2023
Chairs: Benno Overeinder, Suzanne Woolf, Tim Wicinski (remote)
Minutes taken by Paul Hoffman
Only stuff said that happened at the mic is reported here
Administrivia and updates of old work
GNU Name System (Very Short Update), Christian Grothoff
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc
Erik/Shumon/Authors
I left Erik's great comments in
https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/draft-ietf-dnsop-domain-verification-techniques/issues/50
so we don't lose them.
Thanks Erik ! This is great stuff. And I forgot I could request early
reviews, which I now have done with SECDIR and ARTART
tim
To follow up with Shumon and Duane's comments, the title of the document
was changed over time to "DNS Glue Requirements in Referral Responses" to
more accurately reflect the document's contents.
The datatracker name did not change to reflect that.
tim
On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 9:58 PM Wessels,
everyone for their patience
tim
On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 3:44 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> All
>
> The SVCB document has been returned from the RFC Editor, and we thank
> Warren for doing all the crazy process stuff to make this happen. The
> authors have made the
Tim Wicinski has requested publication of draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-https-12 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-svcb-https/
___
DNSOP mailing
All
The SVCB document has been returned from the RFC Editor, and we thank
Warren for doing all the crazy process stuff to make this happen. The
authors have made the changes - removing the references to ECH (and I thank
them for doing this quickly and efficiently). They are creating a
separate
Tim Wicinski has requested publication of draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld-21 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-alt-tld/
___
DNSOP mailing list
I agree with the "ecb-in-svcb" document over a -bis, as the (soon to exist)
registry states only expert review.
The one thing we have not discussed is Warren's comment
[0] Possibly modulo the annoyingly painful "AliasMode clarification"
change:
Thanks Warren for chasing all this process.
Tim
On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 12:54 PM Joe Abley wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 12:39, Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> Instead of just having all of these document stuck indefinitely, I'm
> proposing that we:
> 1: Ask the RFC Editor to return the
(as a chair)
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 9:09 PM Joe Abley wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 21:01, Ted Lemon wrote:
>
> No, my main objection to the current draft is that it’s dismissing the
> problem I raised.
>
>
> Could you restate the problem?
>
> You mentioned that you thought the ambiguity
(speaking without a hat)
I think this includes some good updates around the definition of Glue, and
not because
we've spent many hours wordsmithing this. I would like to see some folks
who have
commented about the definitions in the past, review these changes.
Thanks the authors for their
that this is changed to a BCP.
As an operator, the chairs would love to hear feedback pro or con on their
views on this.
The WGLC will still end on March 2nd, 2023
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 12:06 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
>
> OH Apologies.
>
> I had felt the authors published their new vers
OH Apologies.
I had felt the authors published their new version, but I sent the wrong
draft message out.
Please ignore this and I'll stop trying to be useful today
tim
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 12:04 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> All
>
> The authors and the chairs feel this document
All
The authors and the chairs feel this document has reached the stage where
it's ready for Working Group Last Call.
This starts a Working Group Last Call for:
draft-ietf-dnsop-domain-verification-techniques
Current versions of the draft is available here:
1 - 100 of 609 matches
Mail list logo
