Hi Roy and co-authors, In a discussion elsewhere a point was taken what to do with ANY queries that match the DS and the new extra types. Should the types in this draft be returned only when specifically asked for or should they (a one of them) be returned for ANY query.
And if DS and DELEG match the ANY query at the parent, should the proof of non-existence also match the ANY query? My view is that ANY is garbage, so returning DS/DELEG or NSEC is perfectly fine, but this probably needs to be specified. It is also a perfect time to specify this because of the new types at parent. Ondrej -- Ondřej Surý (He/Him) > On 20. 10. 2025, at 21:40, Roy Arends <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear DNSOP WG, > > First presented at the DD WG, I've now re-submitted the latest version of > Delegation Extensions (including minor updates) to the datatracker with a new > title to reflect "DNSOP". In short: draft-arends-dnsop-delext-00.txt replaces > draft-ppr-dd-auth-delegation-types > > The motivation for moving this to DNSOP was requested by the DELEG WG chairs > at the instruction of our INT AD and welcomed by the DNSOP WG chairs, as it > was thought that the scope of this draft is wider than DELEG. > > Warmly > > Roy Arends > > httpx://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-arends-dnsop-delext/ > > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
