"enable a DNS operator to manage DNS service more completely on behalf of registrants"

[vttale]

Discussion in the chat during the deleg meeting suggested that maybe this was a little too meta about just what was meant, but it also wasn't clear that the actual content of the document was being replied to. But maybe add another phrase at also being able to support operators being able to update the names of nameserver targets.

[vttale]

Proposed: DELEG should enable a DNS operator to manage DNS service more completely on behalf of domain administrators. For example, DELEG could address long-standing issues of DNSSEC record maintenance that now often depend on registrant / registrar interaction. Similarly, DELEG could allow new transports to be deployed by an operator or nameserver names to be changed, without necessitating that delegation information be modified by the domain administrator.

[enygren]

Makes sense to me.

[moonshiner]

Is this hard or soft requirement?

[enygren]

I think a hard requirement as otherwise it is a substantial regression relative to today.

On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 4:08 PM Tim Wicinski @.***> wrote:

Is this hard or soft requirement?

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/moonshiner/draft-wirelela-deleg-requirements/issues/4#issuecomment-2243959359, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABUGCZRDXC6D45DQBJ3NVWLZNWGFDAVCNFSM6AAAAABLJCAZQ2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDENBTHE2TSMZVHE . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: @.*** com>

[moonshiner]

agreed it should be a hard requirement. just wanting it called out.

[vttale]

This comes from soft requirements because it is attempting to solve one of the existing problems. It isn't a regression to not address it; it is the status quo to not address it. (This is separate from the multiple operators issue, which is a hard requirement and would be a regression.)

[vttale]

Addressed in 71ec5c000efcec8cae28c70d003b24b0dbc385d5