Subject: Explicit support during WGLC.

From: Olaf Kolkman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 20:38:27 +0100

Dear colleagues,

We have recently sent out two working group last calls that have seen
minor comments on the NSEC draft, and no comments on the 3 drafts that
make up the DNSSECbis specification. This is worrisome!

Let us explain:

In an (experimental) effort to get things through the IESG faster the
ADs request us to answer a number of questions that will help them
assess if a document is really ready for advancement. One of the questions
that the WG chairs will need to answer is:

  5) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document?  Does it
     represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with
     others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and
     agree with it?

In addition we will have to make statements about the following:

   - are there any reviewers (during the end stages) that merit
     explicit mention as having done a thorough review that resulted
     in important changes or a conclusion that the document was fine
     (except for maybe some nits?)

In the case of DNSSECbis, we know that there have been a number of
people that have been thoroughly involved in specification
review. However, it would be good for speedy progress if the people
reviewed the last versions of the document and would 'stand' for that.

Our Request:

We would like to request the members of this working group to
critically read the documents and bring their motivated statements
about the quality of the documents to the mailing list.

The working group last call on DNSSECbis is next week January 15. We
are willing to give you one extra week on the DNSSECbis document set
and end the WGLC by the 23rd of January, the NSEC++ document WGLC will
be closed by January 15.

If there are no statements about the quality of the document on the
list by Jan 23 we will forward the documents with the specific note
that there was no explicit and motivated support during last
call. Don't be surprised if that would cause delays during IETF
review.

-- Olaf and Olafur
   DNSEXT Chairs.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

---

From: Miek Gieben <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 13:55:06 +0100

For what it is worth: 
we (the NSD team) were able to gather all necessary information from the 2535bis
documents (including NSEC) to implement DNSSEC support in NSD.

As NSD is only authoritative we haven't look at the rescursion stuff as
thoroughly.

regards,
Miek