Subject: RFC 3655 on Redefinition of DNS Authenticated Data (AD) bit

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:13:02 -0800

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        RFC 3655

        Title:      Redefinition of DNS Authenticated Data (AD) bit
        Author(s):  B. Wellington, O. Gudmundsson
        Status:     Standards Track
        Date:       November 2003
        Mailbox:    [email-masked], [email-masked]
        Pages:      8
        Characters: 15646
        Updates:    2535

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-dnsext-ad-is-secure-06.txt

        URL:        ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3655.txt

This document alters the specification defined in RFC 2535.  Based
on implementation experience, the Authenticated Data (AD) bit in the
DNS header is not useful.  This document redefines the AD bit such
that it is only set if all answers or records proving that no answers
exist in the response has been cryptographically verified or otherwise
meets the server's local security policy.

This document is a product of the DNS Extensions Working Group of the
IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol.

This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for
the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the
"Internet Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution
of this memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list.
Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list
should be sent to [email-masked].  Requests to be
added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should
be sent to [email-masked].

Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending
an EMAIL message to [email-masked] with the message body 
help: ways_to_get_rfcs.  For example:

        To: [email-masked]
        Subject: getting rfcs

        help: ways_to_get_rfcs

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to [email-masked].  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.

Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to
[email-masked].  Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC
Authors, for further information.

Joyce K. Reynolds and Sandy Ginoza
USC/Information Sciences Institute

...

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant Mail Reader 
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version
of the RFCs.