Skip to main content

Shepherd writeup

# Document Shepherd Write-Up for draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-bcp

In doing the write for this document, the shepherd went and searched
for all RFCs which had DNSSEC in the title or abstract, along with a few
others and built this table to make sure this BCP was capturing all
relevant information.

## Document History

1. Document was not considered in any other WG.

2. There was no controvesy about this document that caused the WG to not adopt.

3. There are no threats of appeals, or extreme discontent.

4. There are significant number of DNSSEC implemnetations currently.

## Additional Reviews

5. Document contents don't interact with technologies in other working groups or

6. Document does not require any formal expert reviews.

7.  No Yang module

8.  This document contains no sections which require any automated checks.

## Document Shepherd Checks

9.  This document is needed, it is clearly written and complete, and ready for the
    Area Director.

10. The shepherd feels any area reviews would be best served by the ops and sec areas.

11. This document is requested as a Best Current Practice.
    This is the proper type for this document.
    The Datatrack reflects this.

12. Authors are aware of the IPR disclosures; and there are no such IPR disclosures.

13. The author has shown their willingness to be listed as such.

14. There are no I-D nits in this document.

15. All informative references are correct and do not need to be normative.

16. All normative references are freely available.

17. There are no normative downward references

18. All normative references have been published.

19. This document will not change the status of existings RFCs.

20. Review of the IANA considerations section is consistent with this document.
    It identifies existing registries and the RFCs they are defined in.

21. No new IANA Registries