[dnssec-key-tf] Publication method (was: DLV and trust anchor repositories)

>> I'm a fan of IANA running a TAR (trust anchor repository), and I'm
>> happy to see RIPE ask IANA to do so.  (I'm also trying to get the IETF to 
>> instruct IANA to run one via the dlv-iana draft.)
>
> I think we have to be careful here. IMO there are two distinct questions and 
> these should not be intermingled. One is the question of should there be a 
> key repository and who should/could run it. [That's two questions actually.] 
> The other question is what sorts of keys/trust anchors are involved. DLV is 
> the current flavour-of-the-month proposal for trust anchors. But there may be 
> others.
>
> I think we should clarify whether decisions on the trust anchor technology 
> (DLV, whatever) should or shouldn't be independent of those about the 
> repository. ie If there's to be a TAR, should it be TA-technology neutral?

As I wrote yesterday: "I agree with Daniel: 'As many as are required 
by the users.'  Multiple formats are good and I have no strong 
preferences re:  dynamically queriable v. bulk only.  (In particular, 
I'm not going to insist on DLV as a publication format.)"

For sundry reasons, the document in front of the IETF does specify a 
particular publication scheme.  But I think it's best for this 
discussion about an NCC-run TAR to be technology-neutral, at least for 
now.

> BTW, when the topic under discussion changes, can we *please* remember to 
> change the Subject: header to match the new discussion thread? Zillions of 
> messages threaded under "agreements on the use of the repository" are not 
> particularly helpful.

Done.

-- Sam