Re: [dns-wg] DNSSEC Policy Development Process

Jim,

I personally think the reference to DLV needs to be replaced with something more generic

I concur.

So from that perspective, it may be better if the text in the proposal was made more generic. Perhaps it should say something like "The NCC would consider publishing its KSKs in appropriate registries that may emerge to facilitate the establishment of DNSSEC trust anchors"?

I don't think that would be even necessary. The document already states " Maintenance of these keys is a process that does not scale well. We are working to come up with a solution to this issue."

how about establishing a trust anchor for .arpa and have the NCC's KSKs signed by that?

Is .arpa signed? Regards, Marcos