Re: Questions on the new DNSSEC spec

["Scott Rose" <scottr@nist.gov>]

I've learned from experience it is easier to ask yes/no answers than more
general "what should we do".  Otherwise, we will end up with too many
different opinions.

I will change the messages so that one question appears in a message.

Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Bush" <randy@psg.com>
To: "Scott Rose" <scottr@nist.gov>
Cc: <namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: Questions on the new DNSSEC spec


> <chair hat>
>
> > Q1:  From the current discussion on name compression and DNSSEC RRs:
The
> > text describing the "signer's name" of the SIG RR and "next domain name"
of
> > the NXT field should be changed along the lines of the Unknown RR types
> > draft.  That is, name compression MUST NOT be used in these fields when
> > sending on the wire, but a resolver should be able to handle name
> > compression in these fields if they encounter it without error.
> >           a.  "MUST NOT compress DNS names found in the RDATA" is the
> > paraphrased text in the -04 version of the unknown RRs draft.
>
> uh, scott.  i miss that the above is a question.  i believe the goal
> here is too seek consensus in the wg, and your words are more like an
> assertion.  i know this is unintentional, but i am sure it will be
> misread by the black helicopter afficianados and maybe even normal
> humans as well.
>
> folk, please consider these to be questions, and the proposed answers
> to be simply scott's (and maybe others' and maybe not) opinions.
>
> randy
>
>
> --
> to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
> the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
> archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>


--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>