[Yeti DNS Discuss] [rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org: BCP 40, RFC 7720 on DNS Root Name Service Protocol and Deployment Requirements]

[Marc Blanchet]

On 14 Dec 2015, at 5:25, Shane Kerr wrote:

> Davey,
>
> Presumably this means that they must properly answer queries with the
> DO bit set, not that any specific zone must be signed or not.

right. root zone signing is not the duty of the root servers.

Marc.

>
> As far as I know, all Yeti root servers *do* conform to this
> requirement, just like all IANA root servers. :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Shane
>
> On 2015-12-14 10:56:21+0800 (Monday)
> Davey Song (宋林健) <ljsong at biigroup.cn> wrote:
>
>>
>> o  MUST implement DNSSEC [RFC4035] as an authoritative name service.
>>
>> Not all Yeti root server confirm to this requirement. And IANA root 
>> server
>> do not conform to this requirement as well. (Root server also server 
>> the
>> root-servers.net zone)
>>
>> Davey
>>
>> -----邮件原件-----
>> 发件人: discuss [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.yeti-dns.org] 代表 
>> Stephane
>> Bortzmeyer
>> 发送时间: 2015年12月13日 17:53
>> 收件人: discuss at lists.yeti-dns.org
>> 主题: [Yeti DNS Discuss] [rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org: BCP 40, RFC 
>> 7720 on DNS
>> Root Name Service Protocol and Deployment Requirements]
>>
>> By the way, an interesting RFC for us. May be testing all Yeti root 
>> name
>> servers against these rules?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.yeti-dns.org
>> http://lists.yeti-dns.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.yeti-dns.org
> http://lists.yeti-dns.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.yeti-dns.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20151214/707c201e/attachment.html>