You cannot post messages because this group is only available as an archive.
Description:
DNS standards activities, including IETF. (Moderated)
|
|
|
Moderator Vacancy Investigation: comp.protocols.dns.std
|
| |
MODERATOR VACANCY INVESTIGATION (MVI) moderated group comp.protocols.dns.std This is a formal Moderator Vacancy Investigation (MVI), begun because moderated newsgroup comp.protocols.dns.std is not functioning, and may have been abandoned by its moderator(s). This investigation will attempt to verify the reasons for non-function,... more »
|
|
|
Draft agenda for IETF 73
|
| |
...My apologies to the group. But since the meeting in Dublin I have not even had a whole week at home. In fact, the longest stretches were one of 6 days and another of 5 days. But after Minneapolis, I have no travel for some time. I sincerely hope. PS - Alfred, I do have your still unopened-by-me-message with... more »
|
|
|
Zones suitable for AXFR
|
| |
* Stephen Morris: ...t=20 ...I think it's fine to send a mix of multiple versions, with two caveats: For each name, one version is chose that applies to all RRsets for that name, and the served data is not less consistent than any of the zone versions involved (for example, regarding restrictions on names imposed by NS/CNAME/DNAME records in the zone).... more »
|
|
|
draft-bellis-dnsext-dnsproxy-0 0 - WG Item?
|
| |
--=====================_400958 958==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Dear colleagues, This document [link] is within the WG scope. If you support the adoption of this document AND are willing to work towards its progress by reviewing it, please send message to that effect... more »
|
|
|
draft-bellis-dnsext-dnsproxy-0 0
|
| |
...It looks like a fine document to me, and many of the points raised are actually troublesome in real life. What I worry about is that this draft basically says "Please adhere to the DNS RFCs", where it is abundantly clear that proxies so far have not done so. It is questionable if people who disregarded the previous 20 RFCs will heed... more »
|
|
|
Agenda items for Minneapolis, IETF-73
|
| |
I've been debating on requesting a slot for AXFR clarify. But right now it's not likely to be asked for. There was a lot of conversation over AXFR Clarify last meeting but in my one lame attempt at starting a follow up thread I got no where. I had planned to get back to the document when I had a stretch of time... more »
|
|
|
FR: An argument against 0x20 and mitigation by standard labels
|
| |
[ Note: Post was moderated. ] ...Once that 1G gets paged out, you care. But I think this 'entropy' in names business is just nonsense anyway. I am sure I won't be running it, nor advising anyone else to run it. Same for DNSinSEC, err DNSSEC. Sorry I can't give a more detailed response now, but I'm busy writing up a paper for NTIA on DNSSEC... more »
|
|
|
I-D Action:draft-ietf-dnsext-dnsse c-rsasha256-06.txt
|
| |
--NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the DNS Extensions Working Group of the IETF. Title : Use of SHA-2 algorithms with RSA in DNSKEY and RRSIG Resource Records for DNSSEC Author(s) : J. Jansen Filename : draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-rsash a256-06.txt... more »
|
|
|
Fwd: Posting of IPR Disclosure
|
| |
--=====================_144770 488==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed The chairs and editors of number of DNSSEC related RFC's got this notice overnight. This is being posted to the working group for information only, see [link] As usual, the IETF takes no position with respect to the validity of... more »
|
|
|
