Sign in
Version 5.13.0, 2015-03-25
Report a bug

A Framework for DNSSEC Policies and DNSSEC Practice Statements

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 08 and is now closed.

Summary: Needs a YES.

Barry Leiba

Comment (2012-07-19 for -08)

From the shepherd writeup:
> There was a concern about a possible copyright issue, but only in
> respect to a pre-RFC5378 RFC.  Parts of RFC 3647 have been used in the
> draft, so the authors have contacted the authors of RFC 3647 requesting
> permission to use text from it.  All who have replied (four out of five)
> have given that permission.

Response from Tomofumi Okubo:
"We received the permission from the 5th author of RFC3647 shortly after
the writeup was submitted."
So this former DISCUSS is now cleared.

Stephen Farrell

Comment (2012-07-17 for -08)

- 1.1: Is this really for "users" to evaluate the strength of
DNSSEC? I don't know any users who'd do that.  Maybe admins
of some sort.

- PKI definition: I'd love if you deleted non-repudiation
since a PKI, and DNSSEC in particular, doesn't get you that.
(By itself.)


Comment (2012-10-02 for -10)

Thanks for addressing my discuss/comment positions.