--On 11 December 2008 19:51:18 -0800 Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
If so, draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-bis-updates should say so, given that we want that document to reflect reality.
If we are taking the position that rsasha256 etc. should only get one algorithm number, it seems to me that this is argument must effectively be predicated on the belief that supporting NSEC3 in validators is required "in the real world" to exactly the same extent as supporting NSEC. Given the above draft sets out what is required "in the real world" (for the same value of "real world" as before), I think +1. Alex -- 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/>