As document author, this seems like a good time for updating RFC 9364 to add 
important DNSSEC RFCs from the past few years. The IETF still doesn't have a 
good way, other than an RFC, to tell people "here is a definitive description 
of what the $foo protocol means" if the protocol is spread over more than two 
or three RFCs. This WG cares a lot about DNSSEC and good DNSSEC operations, so 
it feels like we should help others with understanding that.

FWIW, I have started to see more non-IETF documents refer to RFC 9364 (instead 
of 4033-4035) when they first mention "DNSSEC", so we do know it is useful. 
This call for adoption is about whether we want to keep this useful thing 
somewhat up-to-date.

--Paul Hoffman

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to