Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-bis-updates-08 - Setting of CD Bit

From: Michael StJohns <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 14:15:01 -0400

Hi Sam - 

The issue is that its pretty difficult to differentiate "Waiting to contemplate the problem" from "Ignoring it and hoping it will go away again".    As long as the current draft text for this problem does not make it into an RFC *and* this gets fixed in the same document as all the other fixes in the draft I will be content.  

Given that we're how many years down the path on -bis-updates,  focusing on closing the last issues quickly is in all of our interests.  So let's set a deadline and try and bring the discussion to a conclusion. 

Mike

At 10:58 PM 3/31/2010, Samuel Weiler wrote:
>On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Michael StJohns wrote:
>
>>This appears to have black-holed yet again.  Could we please work this through to a valid and supportable conclusion?  The language in -11 is wrong.
>
>It's not black-holed, I just didn't delve into it in depth during the meeting week.  Both this and the rollover-and-die fixes need work.
>Would you feel better if we pushed a -12 saying "this section is still broken"?
>
>-- Sam