Zi Hu wrote:
> We recently posted draft-hzhwm-start-tls-for-dns-00 ("Starting TLS over
> DNS") to explore one proposal to add standard TLS over standard DNS to
> improve privacy.
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hzhwm-start-tls-for-dns-00
>
> This topic may be of interest to DNSOP and PERPASS.
We recently posted draft-hzhwm-start-tls-for-dns-00 ("Starting TLS over
DNS") to explore one proposal to add standard TLS over standard DNS to
improve privacy.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hzhwm-start-tls-for-dns-00
This topic may be of interest to DNSOP and PERPASS. Some of the authors
will
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 Working Group
of the IETF.
Title : Initializing a DNS Resolver with Priming Queries
Authors : Peter Koch
Thanks for the information you've provided, I improved the document
according to comments and found out that the report also has a few problems
which is due to the fact that it misinterpreted the of CGA-TSIG document.
Here I explain the problems or the reasons of choices:
- CGA-TSIG cannot use MA
Due to lack of a WG list, sent to dnsop and dnsext
I've updated two drafts:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wouters-edns-tcp-keepalive/
By popular request, the TIMEOUT value can now be used by both clients
and servers to manage their resources and expectations.
Various people requested
I posted my draft on this this topic,
I do not think it is a DNS topic thus I put the appsawg in my draft name:
A new version of I-D, draft-ogud-appsawg-multiple-namespaces-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Olafur Gudmundsson and posted to the
IETF repository.
Name: draft-og
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014, Tony Finch wrote:
Joe Abley wrote:
Reactions and reviews of the two documents would be most welcome!
The as112-dname draft still does not mention the glibc DNAME logging bug.
Which Linux distro, or a set of Linux distros? Some seaches yield various
bug reports relat
On 2014-02-14, at 16:02, Tony Finch wrote:
> Joe Abley wrote:
>>
>> Reactions and reviews of the two documents would be most welcome!
>
> The as112-dname draft still does not mention the glibc DNAME logging bug.
Oops, sorry for missing that, and thanks for the reminder.
In other news, you m
Joe Abley wrote:
>
> Reactions and reviews of the two documents would be most welcome!
The as112-dname draft still does not mention the glibc DNAME logging bug.
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg10638.html
Typo: "flexibl"
Apart from that, looks OK :-)
Tony.
--
f.anthony.
Joe Abley wrote:
> Hi Tony,
Hi Joe, many thanks for the thorough review. It is greatly appreciated.
I think it's fairly obvious that I wrote just enough to get the idea
across in a reasonably complete form, but didn't bother with thorough
references (in particular not to your previous work, sor
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 Working Group
of the IETF.
Title : AS112 Redirection using DNAME
Authors : Joe Abley
Brian D
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 Working Group
of the IETF.
Title : DNS Referral Response Size Issues
Authors : Paul Vixie
Ak
Hi all,
We've just submitted
draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-dname-01
draft-jabley-dnsop-rfc6304bis-00
which together specify an approach to extend the current AS112 project to be
able to sink queries from arbitrary zones, whilst still supporting existing
AS112 semantics.
We hope to present a brie
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 Working Group
of the IETF.
Title : AS112 Redirection using DNAME
Authors : Joe Abley
Brian D
Hi, Tim, I would like to request a time slot of 15 minutes to discuss the
topic on optimizing DNS authority server placement. As we know, the
geographical distribution of DNS authority servers (include root, TLD and other
authority servers in the DNS hierarchy) highly affects the financ
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:58:38AM -0500,
Andrew Sullivan wrote
a message of 18 lines which said:
> > - why not just register a URN namespace and use it as they see fit?
>
> Why didn't they do that in the first place?
Some did. For instance, the magnet people. (Although they apparently
did n
16 matches
Mail list logo