[Yeti DNS Discuss] Error in RFC 8483 about the signing of the root name servers?

[Davey Song(宋林健)]

Hi Stephane,

In the On-boarding document, it is required that Yeti root server Should
support DNSSEC(not only for root zone but also for the name of root server).


We can ask these Yeti root operators to sign their name to support the
function of "Automated Maintenance of the Hints File" . Or we can change it
to say "All Yeti-Root server names are required to be DNSSEC signed". But
I'm not sure it is necessary to file an errata.

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: 2018年12月17日 0:56
> 收件人: discuss at lists.yeti-dns.org
> 主题: [Yeti DNS Discuss] Error in RFC 8483 about the signing of the root
name
> servers?
> 
> RFC 8483 says "All Yeti-Root server names are DNSSEC signed".
> 
> May be it was true at the time of the RFC publication? Because it is false
now,
> yeti.bofh.priv.at, yeti.ipv6.ernet.in, yeti.aquaray.com, yeti-ns.ix.ru,
and
> yeti-ns.wide.ad.jp appear to be unsigned.
> 
> Should I file an errata?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.yeti-dns.org
> http://lists.yeti-dns.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss