I realize this doesn't answer the question "did the group?": Isn't everything subject to local policy? (I think so.) For the sake of interoperability, is this important? (I don't think so.) Therefore I my opinion is that it should be SHOULD. As in a recommendation. At 13:41 -0500 12/14/05, Scott Rose wrote:
I think there is a typo in Section 3, second paragraph: "Validator implementations MUST, by default, ignore DS RRs containing SHA-1 digests if DS RRs with SHA-256 digests are present in the DS RRset. THis behavior SHOULD be the default." Did the group decide on MUST, or SHOULD?
-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis +1-571-434-5468 NeuStar 3 months to the next trip. I guess it's finally time to settle down and find a grocery store. -- 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/>