> -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On > Behalf Of Joe Abley > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 1:06 PM > To: Tony Finch > Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker; IETF Discussion > Subject: Re: DNSCurve vs. DNSSEC - FIGHT! (was OpenDNS today > announced ithas adopted DNSCurve to secure DNS) > > > On 2010-02-24, at 15:50, Tony Finch wrote: > > > On Wed, 24 Feb 2010, Shane Kerr wrote: > >> > >> DNSSEC declares out of scope: > >> * the channel where DS records get added to the parent > > > > Is that actually out of scope or just not specified yet? > > The whole channel from end-user (registrant) to registry > cannot usefully be specified in any general way because there > is no consistent way of interacting with a registrar (in the > name of open competition) and no consistent > registry-registrar-registrant structure across all TLDs (for > reasons that surely would require more than one parenthetical > phrase to describe adequately). > > The component that concerns communication between a registry > and a registrar does have one solution that has been > standardised in the IETF, however, which is being implemented > at some TLDs, I hear. > > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4310.txt Implementation experience has uncovered some deficiencies in 4310. A proposal to address the deficiences is being developed as an individual submission: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-gould-rfc4310bis-05.txt Scott _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf