[secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-idnabis-rationale-13.txt
ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net
Tue Oct 6 17:19:47 CEST 2009
I thought you were being rational up to this point.
I'll help Andrew if he decides to take the (fatal) step, and if he
thinks it useful. It really should be a minor note, but given the level
of confusion around IDN and DNSSEC, we may end up there anyway.
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 10:44:56AM -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
>> said about this. If there is consensus that "say nothing" (or
>> "no reference") is an acceptable alternative, I would recommend
>> that we simply remove that entire subsection rather than trying
>> to fine-tune it.
> I can support that.
>> When the initial form of that paragraph was written a year or
>> two ago, it seemed worthwhile to warn about that situation.
>> However, at this point, maybe it isn't worthwhile enough to
>> justify the effort to fine-tune this section. In an ideal
>> world, the warning probably belongs in the DNSSEC specs, rather
>> than here, anyway.
> Strictly, it's not a protocol issue, but an operations issue, and
> therefore ought probably to be operational advice (likely to be
> reviewed in DNSOP). I cannot believe I am getting up in public and
> saying this, but if people really need that advice to be written down
> somewhere I am willing to write an I-D to say it. Especially if that
> clears the issues with the current IDNA drafts.
More information about the Idna-update