Re: [dnssec-deployment] some observations about .SE's DNSSEC

[Samuel Weiler <weiler@tislabs.com>]

On Thu, 27 Sep 2007, Olaf M. Kolkman wrote:

> The suggestion is that the AD bit is used in the query to signal the 
> readiness to deal with AD bits in the answer.

I support this.  (I would say "set AD in the answer only if either the 
AD or DO bits are set in the query".)

As for where to publish it: unlike most of dnssec-bis-updates, which 
has basically been limited to clarifying underspecifications and 
lesser matters, this looks like a real change.  On the other hand, 
it's small enough that I don't see the benefit of rolling a new 
document.  I'd like to see a little more discussion (and 
implementation?), but, unless discussion leads in some other 
direction, I'll plan to add this to the next revision of 
dnssec-bis-updates.

-- Sam

--
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/>