[dns-operations] .TH signed

Michael Graff michael_graff at isc.org
Wed Apr 8 19:16:46 UTC 2009

Peter Koch wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 01:21:10PM -0500, Michael Graff wrote:
>> Future TLDs which contact us asking what they should do will get the
>> answer "put it in the ITAR, we'll get it from there."  In fact, I spoke
> so, since we're discussing these policy issues right here -- that would suggest
> there's an opt-out procedure?

Sure, from what I can tell, you can opt-out of ITAR at any time.

Yes, I know that was not what you meant.

If the ITAR publishes rules saying that the data cannot be used in the
way DLV uses it, we will of course abide by that.  I feel we are
providing a valuable service to resolver operators.  We trust the ITAR,
and so we import it into our DLV.  I hope that relationship does not
change, because I find both are very useful tools for different types of

For those who want to use a script, or manually track ITAR, go for it.
For those who want to use DLV, great.  For those who want to do both,
that's all good too.  It's all about options.

I do understand some TLDs do not wish their keys to be imported in this
manner.  I have to admit I am not certain why.  I suspect it is some
sort of non-technical requirement that I am not in the path of to know
about.  I hope that technical reasons would prevail, and the best
transition mechanism be used where it fits best for the people we are
doing all this work for, the end users.

Having a key in DLV is not supporting DLV.  Having a key in DLV is
supporting users.  Perhaps I'm being too naive here, but isn't that the
reason we're all here?


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 257 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/dns-operations/attachments/20090408/1d96199c/attachment.sig>

More information about the dns-operations mailing list