[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: private algorithms and the DS record

To: Samuel Weiler <weiler@tislabs.com>, namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: private algorithms and the DS record
From: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:51:05 +0000
Cc: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.4.55.0412211040400.11377@filbert>
References: <41C1ED4A.1060606@verisignlabs.com> <a06110402bdecf217c1a3@[10.31.32.75]> <Pine.GSO.4.55.0412211040400.11377@filbert>
Reply-to: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>

--On 21 December 2004 10:49 -0500 Samuel Weiler <weiler@tislabs.com> wrote:

As for updating the docs, I also prefer an RFC Editor note rather than
a separate doc.


(From a position of relative ignorance) yes I agree - assuming we are
confident we have infact bottomed the problem out as the worst thing
to do would be to half fix it.

Alex

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: private algorithms and the DS record
  - From: David Blacka <davidb@verisignlabs.com>

References:
- private algorithms and the DS record
  - From: David Blacka <davidb@verisignlabs.com>
- Re: private algorithms and the DS record
  - From: Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz>
- Re: private algorithms and the DS record
  - From: Samuel Weiler <weiler@tislabs.com>

Prev by Date: Re: private algorithms and the DS record
Next by Date: Re: private algorithms and the DS record
Previous by thread: Re: private algorithms and the DS record
Next by thread: Re: private algorithms and the DS record
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread