[DNSOP] Re: [Ext] draft-ietf-dnsop-ds-automation: Dedi cated BCP or Cluster with an Existing BCP
Paul Hoffman <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.dnsop |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On May 21, 2026, at 00:26, [email protected] wrote: > We do have so far these two BCP numbers: > > • BCP 207 consists currently of RFC 8027 on DNSSEC Roadblock Avoidance > • BCP 237 consists currently of RFC 9364 on DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC) > My current take is to add draft-ietf-dnsop-ds-automation under BCP 237 (*), but I’m open to WG feedback. As author of BCP 237, I think this is a bad idea. RFC 237 should not be a magnet for glomming on additional best current practices over time; doing so makes it unclear what is being referred to over time. In addition, I don't think adding draft-ietf-dnsop-ds-automation to DNSSEC Roadblock Avoidance makes any sense: they are only vaguely related. Please: let's keep draft-ietf-dnsop-ds-automation as a stand-alone BCP so its readers understand where the "best" does and doesn't apply. --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]