On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:44 PM Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 6:34 PM Mark Andrews wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 11 Mar 2020, at 00:54, Warren Kumari wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 8:28 PM Warren Kumari wrote:
> > >>
> > >> [ Note: CC list edited ]
> > >>
> > >> Hi
On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 6:34 PM Mark Andrews wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 11 Mar 2020, at 00:54, Warren Kumari wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 8:28 PM Warren Kumari wrote:
> >>
> >> [ Note: CC list edited ]
> >>
> >> Hi there authors,
> >>
> >> During the IETF LC Stephane supported the document
> On 11 Mar 2020, at 00:54, Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 8:28 PM Warren Kumari wrote:
>>
>> [ Note: CC list edited ]
>>
>> Hi there authors,
>>
>> During the IETF LC Stephane supported the document (an important
>> document, worthy of publication), but noted that:
>> 1:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 8:28 PM Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> [ Note: CC list edited ]
>
> Hi there authors,
>
> During the IETF LC Stephane supported the document (an important
> document, worthy of publication), but noted that:
> 1: the document only deals with auth servers and that it should be
>
OK.
If there is anything I or the other chairs can do to assist, let us know
thanks
tim
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 5:45 PM Ray Bellis wrote:
> On 25/02/2020 14:52, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> > Any idea when will we see an updated version?
>
> We're looking at it, but the BIND release schedule and
On 25/02/2020 14:52, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> Any idea when will we see an updated version?
We're looking at it, but the BIND release schedule and Mark's TZ (he's
11 hours ahead of me) have been working against us.
Ray
___
DNSOP mailing list
Mark/Ray
Any idea when will we see an updated version?
thanks
Tim
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:40 AM Warren Kumari wrote:
> it's been another 10 days, and I'd really like to get this out the
> door.
>
> When can expect an update?
> W
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:00 AM Warren Kumari
it's been another 10 days, and I'd really like to get this out the door.
When can expect an update?
W
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:00 AM Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> It's been 2 weeks - just making sure this is still in progress.
> I changed the Datatracker state to "Revised ID needed", so I
It's been 2 weeks - just making sure this is still in progress.
I changed the Datatracker state to "Revised ID needed", so I should
see it as new when the new version is submitted.
W
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 10:44 AM Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 10:28 AM Ray Bellis wrote:
>
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 10:28 AM Ray Bellis wrote:
>
> On 13/01/2020 14:48, Warren Kumari wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 8:28 PM Warren Kumari wrote:
> >>
> >> [ Note: CC list edited ]
> >>
> >> Hi there authors,
> >
> > Any idea when you might get a chance to get to address these comments?
On 13/01/2020 14:48, Warren Kumari wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 8:28 PM Warren Kumari wrote:
>>
>> [ Note: CC list edited ]
>>
>> Hi there authors,
>
> Any idea when you might get a chance to get to address these comments?
> This is a useful document, and I'd like to see it progress.
Mark
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 8:28 PM Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> [ Note: CC list edited ]
>
> Hi there authors,
Any idea when you might get a chance to get to address these comments?
This is a useful document, and I'd like to see it progress.
W
>
> During the IETF LC Stephane supported the document (an
[ Note: CC list edited ]
Hi there authors,
During the IETF LC Stephane supported the document (an important
document, worthy of publication), but noted that:
1: the document only deals with auth servers and that it should be
more explicit and
2: that Section 3 is confusing, and that Matt had
On 12/16/19 10:39 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> Do we agree that Knot is wrong and the draft is right? Or is FORMERR
> acceptable?
The discrepancy should disappear eventually:
https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/knot/knot-dns/commit/2b31ee57a7c
I personally do have occasional issues finding out which
On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 06:00:39PM -0800,
The IESG wrote
a message of 53 lines which said:
> The IESG has received a request from the Domain Name System Operations WG
> (dnsop) to consider the following document: - 'A Common Operational Problem
> in DNS Servers - Failure To Communicate.'
>
The IESG has received a request from the Domain Name System Operations WG
(dnsop) to consider the following document: - 'A Common Operational Problem
in DNS Servers - Failure To Communicate.'
as Best Current Practice
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
16 matches
Mail list logo
