Subject: RFC 2538bis

From: Simon Josefsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 22:47:12 +0200

Dear WG,

I am about to submit -02.  The changes are those discussed in:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.dnsext/6939
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.dnsext/7024

which has resulted in the following diff so far:

http://josefsson.org/rfc2538bis/draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2538bis-from--01.diff.html

You can review the new document from:

http://josefsson.org/rfc2538bis/

Or directly as:

http://josefsson.org/rfc2538bis/draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2538bis.txt

The text for the SPKI type now reads:

   The SPKI type is reserved to indicate the SPKI certificate format
   [13], for use when the SPKI documents are moved from experimental
   status.

Is there a better way to say that?  What?  The problem is that the
SPKI spec is on the experimental track, so we can't reference it
normatively.  I have not seen any interest in SPKI support for CERT
records, though, so reserving the type until SPKI hit the full
standards track was what I thought was simplest.  Please comment.

The IANA considerations section include the text proposed by Sam.

I like for people to review whether the changes properly address the
open issues.  I'm not entirely certain the IANA part is closed by
this; Sam, can you confirm one way or the other?

I intend to submit -02 within a week.

Thanks,
Simon

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