To:
EPP Provreg <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
Klaus Malorny <Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de>
Date:
Mon, 01 Feb 2010 09:37:13 +0100
In-Reply-To:
<C78865B1.371EC%jgould@verisign.com>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
User-Agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100128 Shredder/3.0.2pre
Subject:
Re: [ietf-provreg] rfc4310bis 03 AD Feedback
On 29/01/10 16:15, James Gould wrote: > Is there anyone out there supporting or planning on supporting the > client specified maxSigLife. In looking into this in more detail if this > attribute were supported, doesn’t it make more sense for it to be an > attribute outside the dsData or keyData, since it applies to the > domain’s RRSIG and not to an individual DS? This means that it’s an > attribute of the domain and not of the DS. Since we’re not worried about > backward compatibility any longer with the change in the URI we’re open > to remove or move this element. Any thoughts to this? > > -- > > > JG > Hi James, we have implemented this for the puntCAT registry, however I share the concerns around this value, so I wouldn't be too unhappy if it would go or would be reworked (e.g. adding TTL suggestions as well if it then makes more sense). Regarding the separation from the key/DS data: I think I had noted earlier (probably in a private e-mail exchange) that I support this idea, as it is not directly an attribute of key or DS data. Regards, Klaus -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- List run by majordomo software. For (Un-)subscription and similar details send "help" to ietf-provreg-request@cafax.se