[DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-onion-tld-00: (with COMMENT)

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-onion-tld-00: 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

Re: [DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-onion-tld-00: (with COMMENT)

Hi, -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/03/2015 06:00 AM, Benoit Claise wrote: If/Once [tor-rendezvous] is a normative reference, do we consider github as stable enough? What if that link disappears? Github is not involved at all in any of the references of the .onion draft

Re: [DNSOP] Jari Arkko's No Record on draft-ietf-dnsop-onion-tld-00: (with COMMENT)

On 03/09/2015 18:05, Ted Lemon wrote: On Sep 3, 2015, at 11:39 AM, Joel Halpern > wrote: Which means that the real question is whether the references need to be understood to understand the registration. This judgment belongs to the IESG, not to me. I reviewe

[DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-04: (with COMMENT)

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-04: 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

Re: [DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-04: (with COMMENT)

On 18/09/2015 21:00, Tim WIcinski wrote: On 9/16/15 4:55 AM, Benoit Claise wrote: From the shepherd writeup: "One issue raised by the Working Group was that such a list of definitions would be best served with some sort of Index. The authors and the Document Shepherd agree, but fe

Re: [DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-04: (with COMMENT)

Paul, - "Further, some terms that are defined in early DNS RFCs now have definitions that are generally agreed to, but that are different from the original definitions. Therefore, the authors intend to follow this document with a substantial revision in the not-distant future. That revisi

[DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-root-loopback-04: (with COMMENT)

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-root-loopback-04: 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

Re: [DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-root-loopback-04: (with COMMENT)

Paul, On 28 Sep 2015, at 6:53, Benoit Claise wrote: -- COMMENT: -- Malicious third parties might be able to observe that traffic on the network between

[DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation-08: (with COMMENT)

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation-08: 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

[DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-05: (with COMMENT)

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-05: 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

Re: [DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-05: (with COMMENT)

Ray, I understand this. My point is that, at some point in time, history doesn't matter any longer. Regards, Benoit On 06/01/2016 13:46, Benoit Claise wrote: -- CO

Re: [DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis-05: (with COMMENT)

Sara and Ray, I made my point. If you guys feel strongly about that, fine with me. It's a COMMENT after all. Regards, Benoit On 6 Jan 2016, at 15:32, Benoit Claise wrote: Ray, I understand this. My point is that, at some point in time, history doesn't matter any longer. Hi,

[DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-roadblock-avoidance-04: (with COMMENT)

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-roadblock-avoidance-04: 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

[DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-nxdomain-cut-04: (with COMMENT)

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-nxdomain-cut-04: 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

[DNSOP] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-key-tag-04: (with COMMENT)

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-key-tag-04: 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

[DNSOP] AD review: draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps

Dear authors, Here is my AD review. - This section presents a list of problems that have been identified with respect to the assignment of Special-Use Domain Names. Solutions to these problems, including their costs or tradeoffs, are out of scope for this document. There is a br

Re: [DNSOP] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps-05.txt => IETF LC requested.

Regards, Benoit. A new version (-05) has been submitted for draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps-05.txt The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps/ Diff from previous vers

Re: [DNSOP] Spencer Dawkins' Yes on draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps-07: (with COMMENT)

Hi, Hi, Ted, On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Ted Lemon > wrote: Spencer, not to respond to all your comments right now, but just to point this out: the list of problems is not claimed to be correct. It is claimed to be the list of problems that peop