Subject: Advance: draft-ietf-dnsext-nsec-rdata-05.txt

From: "Olaf M. Kolkman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:16:56 +0100

Thomas, Margaret,

Hereby the advancement questionnaire
(www.mip4.org/2004/draft-writeup-items.html) for 
"DNSSEC NSEC RDATA Format" draft-ietf-dnsext-nsec-rdata-05.txt.

The questionaire serves as a request to advance the document
to proposed standard.

1. Chairs review.

The chair responsible for tracking this document has read it and
considers it ready for IESG review.

2. Working Group member review.

The proposed format has been discussed on the list as well as during
the IETF 58 meeting. The content of the comments received during last
call indicate that a number of people have closely reviewed the document.

3. Is more review from a particular perspective needed.

In the chairs opinion not.

4. Specific Issues and concerns the AD/IESG should be aware of.

The document _only_ changes a format. The security section therefore
does not go into the details of NSEC security. Note however that the
text describing this format will be directly 'cut-n-pasted' into the
dnssec-bis document set. The dnssec-bis intro document set covers the 
security considerations, e.g. NSEC cain walking, in more detail.

5. How solid is the WG consensus.

The format was chosen during IETF58. The document itself got explicit
consensus from only a few individuals. On the other hand this is has
not been contentious issue.

6. Thread for appeal.

None.

7. _all_ ID nits addressed.

All are addressed.

8. References

There is a normative reference to an I-D that has been advanced.  Also
not that this document will be merged and obsoleted by the dnssec-bis
document set.

9. Writeup.

Technical Summary

  To prevent the introduction of an extension mechanism once DNSSEC
  has a deployed base this document redefines the wire format of the
  "Type Bit Map" field in the NSEC resource record RDATA format to
  cover the full RR type space.

  The new format of the type bitmap is easy to implement, can cover
  the full range of type codes, is economical in the common case and
  has a maximum size of approximately 8.5 kilobytes. Efficient searching
  of the type bitmap for presence of a type had a lower priority.

Working Group Summary

  The format was chosen from 6 different candidates that were
  presented to the working group. There is consensus on the chosen
  representation.

Protocol Quality

  There are 3 independent implementations of this format. 1 implementation
  provides both a server and a client, 1 implementation only a server and
  1 implementation only a client. These interoperate.

-- Olaf Kolkman 
   Olafur Gudmundsson

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